While much of the online gaming sector is shaped by publicly traded companies, a growing share of market activity is being driven by private operators with unconventional growth paths.
Nexus International and Virtual Gaming Worlds (VGW) represent two such firms, each privately held, each diversified across digital verticals and each operating outside the constraints of traditional public capital structures. Their models, however, diverge sharply in geography, product focus and monetisation approach.
VGW, founded in Australia in 2010, operates social gaming platforms including Chumba Casino and LuckyLand Slots.
The company offers sweepstakes-based casino gaming in markets like the United States, where real-money online gambling is restricted in many jurisdictions. By designing around promotional credit mechanics, VGW has reached a wide user base while avoiding direct licencing conflicts in states without online casino regulation. In 2023, VGW’s estimated revenue surpassed $900 million, with the bulk of its earnings derived from North America.
Nexus International, by contrast, reported $546 million in revenue in the first half of 2025, representing a 110% year-over-year increase. Its brand portfolio includes Megaposta (a Brazil-facing sportsbook), Spartans.com (a crypto-compatible global casino) and Lanistar (a fintech-gaming hybrid platform).
Rather than operating within the social or sweepstakes gaming framework, Nexus pursues licenced real-money gambling across markets where local regulations permit, most notably Brazil, where it secured one of the country’s first SIGAP licences under the new betting law.
The companies also differ in how they define platform identity. VGW maintains a tightly integrated product suite under its sweepstakes model, prioritising compliance and UX within a specific framework. Its growth has relied on refining this format, while limiting expansion into unrelated verticals.
Nexus, on the other hand, operates distinct platforms for different user archetypes, a mobile-first casino (Spartans), a financial-gaming crossover (Lanistar) and a regulated sportsbook (Megaposta), each with its own UI, marketing funnel and geographic strategy.
Structurally, both firms operate without external shareholders or board-appointed oversight. VGW has remained privately owned and profit-generating for over a decade. Nexus is younger but follows a similar path: 100% founder-owned, with no institutional capital or governance dilution.
These models allow for high decision velocity but also concentrate accountability. In both cases, the companies have traded slower capital inflows for tighter operational control.
A critical difference lies in regulatory positioning. VGW’s sweepstakes framework has enabled it to scale in difficult markets by avoiding classification as real-money gambling. This strategy carries fewer compliance hurdles but also limits platform features and revenue types.
Nexus, by pursuing formal licencing in Brazil and targeting regulated casino growth through Spartans.com, faces higher barriers to entry but has access to broader monetization mechanisms, including crypto, local fiat and financial tooling.
While VGW operates primarily in North America, Nexus’s expansion footprint includes Latin America, parts of Europe and emerging crypto-permissive regions. The result is a contrast in regional exposure: VGW reflects market depth in a narrow regulatory model, while Nexus reflects market breadth across a portfolio of licences and formats.
Taken together, Nexus International and VGW represent two variants of private-sector scale: one rooted in social gaming mechanics and long-term product stability, the other in licenced wagering and platform diversity.
Neither approach is inherently superior, but both reflect how private operators are shaping the next phase of online gambling growth, not through visibility on public exchanges, but through focused execution within defined structural advantages.
