#1DRAFT KINGS ARE DRAFTKINGS INVESTOR DAY MARCH 2022 a de#2Legal disclaimer No Offer or Solicitation This presentation does not constitute a solicitation of a proxy, consent or authorization with respect to any securities of DraftKings Inc. (“DraftKings", "the Company", "we" or "us"). This presentation also does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy securities, nor will there be any sale of securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction. No offering of securities will be made except by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or an exemption therefrom. Industry and Share Data This presentation includes information and statistics regarding market participants in the sectors in which DraftKings competes and other industry data which was obtained from third-party sources, including reports by market research firms and company filings. Trademarks This presentation may contain trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights of other companies, which are the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, some of the trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights referred to in this presentation may be listed without the TM, SM O or Ⓡ symbols, but we will assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, the rights of the applicable owners, if any, to these trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights. Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures This presentation includes non-GAAP financial measures, including EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA. We believe that these non-GAAP measures are useful to investors for two principal reasons. First, we believe these measures may assist investors in comparing performance over various reporting periods on a consistent basis by removing from operating results the impact of items that do not reflect core operating performance. Second, these measures are used by DraftKings' management to assess its performance and may (subject to the limitations described below) enable investors to compare the performance of the Company to its competition. We believe that the use of these non-GAAP financial measures provides an additional tool for investors to use in evaluating ongoing operating results and trends. These non-GAAP measures should not be considered in isolation from, or as an alternative to, financial measures determined in accordance with GAAP. Other companies may calculate these non-GAAP financial measures differently, and therefore such financial measures may not be directly comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. Projected Financial Information This presentation contains financial forecasts, which were prepared in good faith by DraftKings on a basis believed to be reasonable. Such financial forecasts have not been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"). DraftKings' independent auditors have not audited, reviewed, compiled or performed any procedures with respect to the projections for the purpose of their inclusion in this presentation, and accordingly, they have not expressed an opinion nor provided any other form of assurance with respect thereto for the purpose of this presentation. These projections are for illustrative purposes only and should not be relied upon as being necessarily indicative of future results. Certain of the above-mentioned projected information has been provided for purposes of providing comparisons with historical data. The assumptions and estimates underlying the prospective financial information are inherently uncertain and are subject to a wide variety of significant business, economic and competitive risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in the prospective financial information. Projections are inherently uncertain due to a number of factors outside of DraftKings' control. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the prospective results are indicative of the future performance of DraftKings or that actual results will not differ materially from those presented in the prospective financial information. Inclusion of the prospective financial information in this presentation should not be regarded as a representation by any person that the results contained in the prospective financial information will be achieved. | 2#3Legal disclaimer (continued) Forward-Looking Statements and Non-GAAP Financial Measures This presentation, and the accompanying oral presentation, contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, about us and our industry that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this presentation, including statements regarding guidance, our future results of operations or financial condition, business strategy and plans, user growth and engagement, product initiatives, and objectives of management for future operations, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business and the economy as a whole, are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements because they contain words such as "anticipate," "believe," "contemplate," "continue," "could," "estimate," "expect," "forecast," "going to," "intend,” “may," "plan," "potential," "predict," "project," "propose", "should," "target," "will," or "would" or the negative thereof or comparable terminology, or by discussions of vision, strategy or outlook. We caution you that the foregoing may not include all of the forward-looking statements made in this presentation. You should not rely on forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. We have based the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation on our current expectations and projections about future events and trends, including the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, that we believe may affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other factors, including those described in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), which are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov. In addition, the forward-looking statements in this presentation relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made and are based on information available to us as of the date of this presentation. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements made in this presentation to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation or to reflect new information or the occurrence of unanticipated events, including future developments related to the COVID-19 pandemic, except as required by law. We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions, or expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Our forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact of any future acquisitions, mergers, dispositions or investments. A | 3#4Investor Day Takeaways 1 2 3 TAM larger than we thought for both OSB and iGaming; increasing total North America estimate from $67B to $80B 5 Top 3 operators in U.S. OSB industry account for 80%+ of GGR; DKNG GGR share 25% and 19% for OSB and iGaming, respectively Investment in product features will drive continued industry leadership 4 Customer and state profit results are very strong; 5 states contribution profit positive in FY 2021 and 10 states anticipated to be contribution profit positive in FY 2022 Increasing long-term Adjusted EBITDA outlook to $2.1B 6 New verticals off to strong initial start and expect to be contribution profit positive in FY 2022, validating our thesis of LTV/CAC flywheel | 4#5DRAFT KINGS TAM AND LEGALIZATION ARE Supe a de#6● NJ's OSB gross revenue per adult - assuming no growth going forward - implies a U.S. OSB TAM of $28B or $26B if we adjust for the state's relative GDP ● Estimated U.S. Online Sports Betting Gross Revenue ($ in millions) 2011-1 $360 +47% NJ 2020 NJ OSB Launched in August 2018 $54 NJ 2018 $244 NJ 2019 +106% $740 $28B NJ 2021 (1) Population method applies 2023E OSB gross revenue per adult for NJ ($107) to the 2023E U.S. adult population. (2) GDP method adjusts the TAM extrapolations for NJ's GDP per adult relative to the U.S.'s GDP per adult. Implied U.S. TAM (Population Method)(¹) $26B Implied U.S. TAM (GDP Method)(2) NJ OSB was $0.7B industry in 2021 and grew at a 74% CAGR from 2019 through 2021 Assuming 0% growth from 2021 to 2023, a mature NJ implies $28B in Gross Revenue at 100% legalization ($107 Gross Revenue per adult) Adjusting for GDP per adult of NJ vs. that of the U.S., the U.S. opportunity is $26B in Gross Revenue at 100% legalization ($98 Gross Revenue per adult) Source: NJ Department of Gaming Enforcement; U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Note: U.S. adult population is estimated to be 265 million in 2023. Per U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. adult population is projected to be 259 million and 279 million in 2020 and 2030, respectively. We estimate the 2023 figure by assuming the U.S. adult population grows on a straight-line basis from 2020 to 2030. All U.S. TAMs are calculated using this 2023E population figure. $ SPORTSBOOK 9:41 +SAME GAME PARLAY Popular Game THU AUG 3RD ATL Falcons MIN Vikings TD Scorer Dalvin Cook Younghoe Koo Adam Thielen NFL Atlanta Falcons @Minnesota Vikings A Home Game Lines A3 Pick Parlay In-Game +3 First First Team Props POINT SPREAD TOTAL POINTS MONEYLINE First 0 55.5 目 My Bets U 55.5 Last Last Add To Bet Slip 3 Picks @ +445 Last all (0 All Sports $13.67K 1,534 Game Lines ATL MIN To Score To Score To Score +445 Promos | 6#7NJ is an appropriate extrapolation point given its gross revenue per adult compared to other states OSB Gross Revenue Per Adult - First Consecutive September to December (Four Months of Gross Revenue Per Adult) Gross Revenue / Adult as % of NJ NJ Adj. Gross Revenue / Adult(¹) Adj. Gross Revenue / Adult as % of NJ ● ● ● ● $7.27 NJ 100% $7.27 100% $3.26 WV 45% $5.10 70% $12.00 IN 165% $15.11 208% $5.90 PA 81% $6.67 92% $12.30 NH 169% $13.72 189% $13.85 IA (3) 190% $15.98 220% $12.16 со 167% $12.41 171% $11.43 IL 157% $11.78 162% $20.75 Source: State Gaming Data; U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Note: Slight discrepancies compared to 2021 Investor Day disclosures are due to reliance upon more recent Census Bureau and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis data. (1) Adjusted Gross Revenue /Adult for GDP per adult in each state relative to that of NJ. (2) AZ Gross Revenue / adult for October and November 2021 combined was $15.13, while NJ gross revenue / adult for October and November 2018 was $3.35. (3) lowa's results reflect September to December 2021 due to the fact mobile registration began in the state in January 2021. Gross Revenue / Adult for September to December 2019 was $3.38, or $3.90 adjusted for relative GDP per adult. TN 285% $27.24 374% $17.45 Non-NJ Gross Revenue / Adult = $13.02 NJ Gross Revenue / Adult = $7.27 MI 240% $23.59 $21.12 324% We benchmarked Gross Revenue per adult for the first September through December for the 10 states in which DraftKings' brand had launched prior to September 2021 Used September to December to control for seasonality of sports calendars and different launch dates Eight of the ten states were larger than NJ on a Gross Revenue per Adult basis during this period, each by more than 50% AZ, which launched in September 2021, outperformed NJ in its first full October and November by 351% on a Gross Revenue per Adult basis(2) VA 290% $23.40 322% | 7#8NJ's iGaming gross revenue per adult - assuming no growth going forward - implies a U.S. iGaming TAM of $52B or $48B if we adjust for the state's relative GDP ● Estimated U.S. iGaming Gross Revenue ($ in millions) $123 NJ 2014 $149 NJ 2015 +25% CAGR $197 NJ 2016 DKNG launched NJ iGaming in late December 2018 $246 NJ 2017 $299 NJ 2018 +80% CAGR $483 NJ 2019 $970 1-11 NJ 2020 $1,367 +41% $52B NJ 2021 Implied U.S. TAM (Population Method)(¹) $48B Implied U.S. TAM (GDP Method)(2) NJ iGaming was $1.4B industry in 2021; growth accelerated following the introduction of OSB in August 2018 • Assuming 0% growth from 2021 to 2023, a mature NJ implies $52B in Gross Revenue at 100% legalization ($197 Gross Revenue per adult) Adjusting for GDP per adult of NJ vs. that of the U.S., the U.S. opportunity is $48B in Gross Revenue at 100% legalization ($180 Gross Revenue per adult) THE CASINO FLOOR IS ALL YOURS. 11:28 AM 94 LIVE DEALER BLACKJACK Suggested P MACKINGK DOWN CASINO DAILY FANTASY BLACKJACK MB100M Bet ano000 TABLE GAMES ROULETTE Single Hand Blackjack £100 | Man 1600000 My Ba Pay EQ A-Sports SLOTS Source: NJ Department of Gaming Enforcement; U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis Note: U.S. adult population is estimated to be 265 million in 2023. Per U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. adult population is projected to be 259 million and 279 million in 2020 and 2030, respectively. We estimate the 2023 figure by assuming the U.S. adult population grows on a straight-line basis from 2020 to 2030. All U.S. TAMs are calculated using this 2023E population figure. (1) Population method applies NJ 2023E Gross Revenue per adult of $197 for iGaming to the 2023E U.S. population. (2) GDP method adjusts the TAM extrapolations for NJ's GDP per adult relative to the U.S.'s GDP per adult. & DRAFTKINGS ROULETTE MARCH MANIA | 8#9Extrapolating from NJ is likely conservative given PA and MI's iGaming performance iGaming Gross Revenue Per Adult - 2021 State Performance Benchmarked to NJ in 2019 (Twelve Months of Gross Revenue Per Adult)(¹) Gross Revenue / Adult as % of NJ NJ Adj. Gross Revenue / Adult Adj. Gross Revenue / Adult as % of NJ ● ● ● ● $69.52 NJ 2019 (6th Full Year of iGaming) 100% $69.52 100% $42.55 WV 2021 (1st Full Year of iGaming) 61% $66.50 96% $131.88 Source: State Gaming Data; U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (1) Michigan Gross Revenue per adult is calculated based on less than 12 full months of data because the state launched in January 2021. (2) Pennsylvania Gross Revenue is calculated based on Eilers & Krejcik estimates, considering the state reports revenue after promotions. PA 2021 (2nd Full Year of iGaming)(²) 190% $149.12 215% We benchmarked Gross Revenue per adult in 2021 to the first calendar year in NJ after both OSB and iGaming launched (2019) Methodology sets a conservatively high benchmark with NJ 2019, considering the state launched iGaming (but not OSB) in November 2013 Michigan outperformed NJ on a Gross Revenue per adult basis by 104%, or 176% when adjusting for GDP per adult Pennsylvania outperformed NJ on a Gross Revenue per adult basis by 90%, or 115% when adjusting for GDP per adult $142.10 Non-NJ Gross Revenue / Adult = $105.51 NJ Gross Revenue / Adult = $69.52 MI 2021 (Partial Year of iGaming) 204% $192.09 276% | 9#10OSB is legal in states representing 44% of the U.S. population; iGaming at 13% Indicates states in which DraftKings is currently live, representing 36% of the U.S. population for OSB and 11% for iGaming Legalized Sports Betting (¹) Legalized & Live OSB(3) 1 New Jersey ******* West Virginia ....... 3 Indiana 4 Oregon 5 Pennsylvania .………..... *********** 6 New Hampshire 7 owa 8 Colorado ......…..…………….. 9 Illinois 10 Tennessee 11 Michigan 12 Virginia 13 Wyoming 14 Arizona 15 Connecticut 16 New York ............. 17 Louisiana 18 Nevada 19 Rhode Island *************** 20 Washington, DC 21 Maryland 22 Ohio *********** 23 Puerto Rico 24 Delaware ****** 25 Mississippi 26 New Mexico (5) 27 Montana State ............... .............. 28 Arkansas 29 North Carolina ************** 30 Washington (5) 31 South Dakota 32 Nebraska 33 Wisconsin (5) ***************25) 34 North Dakota (5) % of U.S. Population % of U.S. Population 3% 1% 2% 1% 4% 0% 1% 2% 4% 2% 3% 3% 0% 2% 1% 6% 1% 1% 0% 0% 2% 4% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% 1% 3% 2% 0% 1% 2% 0% 55% Legalized OSB(2) ✓ ✓ 44% ✓ (4) Indicates states with legalized iGaming. Nevada has online poker only. (5) In New Mexico, Washington, Wisconsin, and North Dakota, sports betting is limited to provision by Native American tribes. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 38% Legalized iGaming (4) 13% ● ● Source: U.S. Census Bureau Note: States within each category sorted by launch date where applicable. Live DKNG states sorted by DKNG launch date. Washington, DC and Puerto Rico are considered states for the purposes of this page. (1) Indicates states that have legalized sports betting in some form. (2) Indicates states that have legalized online sports betting. (3) Indicates states that have legalized online sports betting, that are also currently live. Following the repeal of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) in May 2018, 34 states, representing approximately 55% of the U.S. population, have legalized sports betting in some form (retail, mobile, or both) 23 states have legalized online sports betting, representing approximately 44% of the U.S. population 20 states are live with online sports betting, representing 38% of the U.S. population (3 states representing 6% of the population are legal-pending- launch) DraftKings is live in 17 states with online sports betting, representing approximately 36% of the U.S. population • 7 states, representing approximately 13% of the U.S. population have legalized some form of iGaming DraftKings is live in 5 states with iGaming, representing approximately 11% of the U.S. population | 10#11Extrapolating based on NJ assuming no growth going forward, the Canadian OSB and iGaming TAM is between $6B and $9B Estimated Canadian Online Sports Betting and iGaming Gross Revenue ● ● $3B OSB $2B Population Method (¹) GDP Method (2) There was significant legislative momentum in Canada on both the federal and provincial level in 2021 Federal legislation passed to legalize single event sports wagering in early 2021 Ontario's provincial government has announced that regulated OSB and iGaming will launch in April 2022 $6B iGaming $4B Source: U.S. Census Bureau; New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement; Statistics Canada; U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; World Bank Note: Per Statistics Canada, the Canadian adult population is projected to be 31 million in 2023. All Canadian TAMs are calculated using this 2023E population figure. (1) Population method applies NJ 2023E Gross Revenue per adult of $107 and $197 for OSB and iGaming, respectively, to the 2023E Canadian population. (2) GDP method adjusts the TAM extrapolation for NJ's GDP per adult relative to Canada's GDP per adult. Specifically, Canada's GDP per adult is 0.66x NJ's GDP per adult, implying a Gross Revenue per adult of $70 and $129 for OSB and iGaming, respectively. | 11#12DRAFT KINGS U.S. OSB AND IGAMING SHARE ARE EEE a de#13There are several intricacies when assessing state-reported share by operator State Reported Share Considerations 1 2 3 4 State reports have a wide range of transparency; 4 of our 17 states provide operator- specific net revenue, 5 provide operator-specific handle and GGR, and 8 do not provide operator-specific metrics Some states report with cash accounting and others accrual accounting, which can impact monthly results Promotion types are accounted for differently on a state-by-state basis; state specific accounting of certain promotions can obfuscate operator-level GGR "Total share" can be defined differently; we define total share as all states that have legalized OSB and iGaming since the repeal of PASPA | 13#14We provide an example to illustrate how an operator's mix of promotions may significantly impact state-reported gross revenue share Example assumptions: Two operators; each with 50% handle share, 4% of handle driven by promotions; one utilizes only free bets (typically recognized at a hold rate of approximately 45%), while the other only utilizes profit and odds boosts; same skilled players for each operator (assume a hold rate of 7% on cash wagers) Illustrative Example: Operator Using Only Free Bets ($ in millions) Handle Driven By Promotions $2.0 -65% GGR Share II.1. i. $48.0 $4.3 $2.3 GAAP Net Revenue $48.0 1 Handle Illustrative Example: Operator Using Only Profit and Odds Boosts ($ in millions) Gross Revenue Handle Driven By Promotions $2.0 I Handle -35% GGR Share $2.3 Gross Revenue $2.3 GAAP Net Revenue | 14#15● There are three methodologies to consider when evaluating U.S. share Methodology 1 (Total U.S.) Total U.S. share: Measures an operator's ability to get live and capture share across all states ● • DraftKings' Q4 results below 28% 24% 19% (1) OSB GGR iGaming GGR Methodology 2 (Total U.S., Since PASPA Repeal) • Total U.S. share, excluding Nevada: Measures an operator's ability to get live and capture share in states that have launched since the repeal of PASPA DraftKings' Q4 results below 32% OSB Handle 25% 19% OSB GGR (2) OSB Handle Source: State Gaming Reports and DraftKings internal data Notes: Gross revenue as calculated pursuant to each state's definition; no adjustments were made to this state data; iGaming share calculations include poker revenue. (1) DraftKings' iGaming share does not include contribution from GNOG, as any contribution would be dependent on the close of our previously announced acquisition. GNOG's share was 4% of GGR using this methodology. (2) DraftKings' iGaming share does not include contribution from GNOG, as any contribution would be dependent on the close of our previously announced acquisition. GNOG's share was 4% of GGR using this methodology. (3) DraftKings' iGaming share does not include contribution from GNOG, as any contribution would be dependent on the close of our previously announced acquisition. GNOG's share was 6% of GGR using this methodology. Methodology 3 (States Only Where the Operator is Live) iGaming GGR ● Total share in states an operator is live: Measures an operator's ability to capture share in only the states where it is live DraftKings' Q4 results below 32% OSB Handle 25% OSB GGR 19% (3) ¡Gaming GGR | 15#16Number of Operators DraftKings and two other operators typically account for 80%+ of each state's OSB GGR Q4 2021 OSB GGR Share (% of GGR) 21 22% 78% NJ 8 15% 86% WV 13 19% 81% Source: State Gaming Reports; Eilers & Krejcik Gaming Note: Number of operators as of December 31, 2021. IN 1 100% OR 12 20% 80% PA 1 100% NH 17 Top 3 Operators 27% 73% IA 25 18% 82% CO ■ Other Operators 15% 85% IL 8 9% 91% TN 14 20% 81% MI 11 11% 89% VA 2 100% 11 Population Weighted Average = 84% WY 23% 77% AZ 3 100% CT | 16#17DraftKings is in more states than any other OSB operator Number of Live States by Operator Live % U.S. Population 17 States DRAFT KINGS 36% 15 States Operator #2 34% 14 States Operator #3 34% Source: DraftKings Internal Analysis Note: Does not include operators who are only live in 1 state. 14 States 13 States 30% Operator #4 Operator #5 Operator #6 12 States 32% 27% 10 States 9 States Operator #7 Operator #8 25% 23% 7 States 6 States Operator #9 Operator #10 18% 14% 5 States Operator #11-#12 4 States Operator #13-#15 3 States Operator #16-#17 2 States Operator #18-#23 | 17#181 2 3 6 9 keys to our unique and sustainable differentiation 7 Trusted Brand 4 Product Innovation & User Centricity Daily Fantasy User Database 5 Vertical Integration 9 Our Marketing Machine Single Wallet Across Products Geographic Flexibility & Velocity 8 Scalable Regulatory Platform Data Science Powerhouse Preferred real money gaming brand among U.S. consumers ~6M all-time paid users, 10+ years of data creates meaningful head start for acquisition Tech driven platform drives optimization based on player specific LTV Outpacing competition with mobile products maximizing engagement Pure focus on creating unique products for U.S. sports fan powered on in-house platform Seamless experience across states & DKNG products Tech built for DFS is leveraged to rapidly enter new Sportsbook states Stable, secure platform ensures responsible gaming, data privacy and security Personalization, automation fueled by robust user level analytics | 18#19We have made significant progress across product roadmap priorities with exciting new developments to come Our Roadmap: The 4 C's of DraftKings' Consumer Product Strategy Control Content Connectivity Customer Experience DraftKings will control its own destiny across every consumer product it operates by owning and operating all of its own core technology DraftKings will offer the broadest possible suite of content across any real-money-gaming platform in the U.S. DraftKings will create an integrated ecosystem of consumer experiences, powered by proprietary data & marketing tech DraftKings will create a fun, exciting and personalized experience by creating products that anticipate and respond to our customers' behaviors t | 19#20iGaming is a great example of how we have been able to differentiate from our competition when we own our technology platform DraftKings iGaming: Areas Of Historical and Future Investment 27 New titles from DK Studio in 2021; now 51 DK Games total 5 Numbers Selected 11 12 21 22 31 32 33 34 14 45 $1.00 51 52 53 54 55 56 61 62 63 64 65 66 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 Balance: $738924.96 10 $0 $0 $63 $16 $2 18 25 26 27 28 35 36 37 38 39 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 57 58 59 60 68 69 70 78 79 80 9-10 19 20 30 Source: Internal DraftKings data (1) DraftKings launched DK Rocket in September 2021. 40 -60% Handle From DK Home-Grown Games in 2021 DOUBLE DOWN SPLIT Balance: STAND BLACKJACK 21 INSURANCE PAYS 2 Dealer must stand an 17 and draw an 16 PAYS 3 to 2 $10 $1990 11 65 HIT ***** 90k+ Distinct Users Have Played DK Rocket(1) Bet Amount $1 Place Wager 2.50 1.50 LEIx 8.76x435x 26.29 130 135 1.03 Balance: $1999 0***0 Wager placed, joining next round! BAIL Preparing for Launch 3. 1 player on board! 8.75 Auto Cashout G 1000x .865 100k 82.79 437 1.30 120x- 1.10- 1.00->> 140x 1.60x 150x 1.80x 2.20- 2.3x 2.00-> 2.40x-> 2.50x t | 20#21Following the completion of our migration, we shifted focus to invest heavily in content expansion for our OSB product Same Game Parlay 9:41 < NFL ✓ SAME GAME PARLAY POPULAR GAME LV Raiders CIN Bengals GAME LINES ANYTIME TOUCHDOWN SCORER Passing TDs are not included Home Joe Mixon Ja'Marr Chase Hunter Renfrow A2 Pick Parlay In-Game TD SCORERS QB PROPS Spread +5.5 -5.5 Total 目 My Bets $120.68K 1,534 0 48.5 U 48.5 Josh Jacobs Add To Bet Slip 2 Picks @ +250 Tee Higgins Tyler Boyd All Sports Money LV CIN HALI +250 8 Promos NFL Player Props 9:41 < NFL ✓ TB BUCCANEERS 13-4, 1st NFC North POPULAR GAME LINES Touchdowns Home Over 2.5 +750 Over 1.5 +750 Sun, Jan 16 8:00 pm AT Yards Over 1.5 +750 TOM BRADY TOTAL TOUCHDOWNS AVG TD per game: 2.5 In-Game JALEN HURTS TOTAL TOUCHDOWNS AVG TD per game: 1.17 ılı PLAYER PROPS I First Down My Bets PHI EAGLES 9-8, 2nd NFC East $120.68K 1,534 LEONARD FOURNETTE TOTAL TOUCHDOWNS AVG TD per game: 1.17 Under 2.5 +180 TD SCORERS Under 1.5 +625 Ⓒ Under 1.5 +625 All Sports Last Play Promos In-Game Micro-Markets ATL 9:41 Drive Result 5 PLAYS 74 YARDS 560 2nd &10 Tracker ATL 20 24 PHI 17-10 NY T 2:16 Q3, 1st & 10 PHI 75 Touchdown -110 Punt Next Play OT 9:59 50 $ (0:17) J.Winston completed pass to B.Perriman (ATL 0) for 24 yards. Touchdown. Drive Result What will the result of the drive be? Place Bet First Down all 10.00 SET WAGER AMOUNT TOUCHDOWN Passing Field Goal -110 Turnover $13.67K 1,534 Last P 5 My Bets | 21#222022 will be a year of innovation for our OSB product; social functionality is one way we will differentiate from competition and drive long-term retention Friends Dashboard Bet Groups Popular/Friends Bet Feed 9:41 STA JAILY ( NEW YI OFFERS CO ATP GE FOR D FRIENDS CHAT Willie 3 open bets A Alan 1 open bet Craig 8 bets in the past 2 weeks Jacob 2 bets in the past 2 weeks MY FRIENDS Wayne 2 open bets Henry 12 bets in the past 2 weeks Grace 8 bets in the past 2 weeks MY GROUPS Vincent 1 open bet John 6 bets in the past 2 weeks Daniel 2 bets in the past 2 weeks Robert Karen 2 bets in the past 2 bets in the past 2 weeks 2 weeks STA JAILY ( NEW YI OFFERS CO 9:41 ATP GE FO m a FRIENDS CHAT BB FB BB BB BB 9 MY FRIENDS FB Boston Best Bets 18.6K Members - 286 bets Friend Bets 16 Members 286 bets Boston Best Bets 18.6K Members 286 bets Boston Best Bets 18.6K Members 286 bets Boston Best Bets 18.6K Members - 286 bets MORE GROUPS FOR YOU Friend Bets 16 Members - 286 bets MY GROUPS 86 37 Join 9:41 < NFL ✓ V GAME LINES Popular 286 DK SOCIAL NEW Check this out... Recent DK Sportsbook. 12h ago 297.7K followers Home 9 Picks Parlay pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName 82 SGP 9 Picks $120.68K 1,534 Bryan Knight 2.68M followers Placed by Tyler and 2.6K others +1690 TEAM FUTURES You most spend money to make money! In-Game • 12h ago pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName, pickName, all 目 My Bets All Sports SEASON SI Follow û Follow Promos Spectator Mode 4.82K 12 Don. Primetime's Live Stream Don. Primetime 48-13 FEED AUTO-ADD BETS TO SLIP NEW 1 min ago Man Utd +0.5 Watford vs Man Utd Nov 16, 2021, 8:47:18 AM 5 mins ago Home Parlay (2 Pick) *Odds shown above reflect odds at the time of post and are subject to change. In-Game CHAT My Bets SPREAD -650 -303 Ⓒ All Sports LIVE Promos | 22#23Based on conservative end of TAM ranges, DraftKings is on track to achieve $6.7B to $9.5B North American OSB and iGaming gross revenue at maturity DraftKings Online Sports Betting $26B Implied Total U.S. TAM(1) $48B Implied Total U.S. TAM(3) $6B Implied Total Canadian TAM(5) 65% of U.S. Population with Legalized OSB(2) 30% of U.S. Population with Legalized iGaming(4) 64% of Canada Population with Legalized OSB and iGaming * Source: NJ Department of Gaming Enforcement; U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (1) Based on GDP method extrapolation on page 6. 20-30% DraftKings' OSB Share DraftKings iGaming 20-25% DraftKings' iGaming Share(5) DraftKings Canada 10-20% DraftKings' Canada Share DKNG Q4 GGR shares of 25% and 19%(6) for OSB and iGaming, respectively $3.4-5.1B in Gross OSB Revenue $2.9-3.6B in Gross iGaming Revenue $400-800mm in Gross OSB and iGaming Revenue DraftKings' OSB and iGaming Gross Revenue $6.7-9.5B (2) OSB is legalized in states representing 44% of the U.S. population today. (3) Based on GDP method extrapolation on page 8. (4) iGaming is legalized in states representing 13% of the U.S. population today. (5) Based on GDP method extrapolation on page 11. (6) iGaming share calculation includes poker revenue. iGaming share does not include contribution from Golden Nugget Online Gaming, Inc. ("GNOG") as any contribution would be dependent on the close of our previously announced acquisition. GNOG's Q4 iGaming share was 4% of GGR. | 23#24DRAFT KINGS UNIT ECONOMICS ARE EEE a de#25Clear path to profitability based on customer payback periods and state-level economics; multiple proof points achieved already What This Means Proof Points ● ● Customer Cohort Economics We invest in acquiring players with goal of 2-3 year gross profit payback • The gross profit from that player is the net revenue per player (net of promotions) and the gross margin on that revenue ● We invest to acquire a player based on 2 to 3 year gross profit being at least as much as what we spent to acquire the customer Gross margin improves over time as promotional intensity declines, and we make operational improvements to our COGS Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3 customer retention were 83%, 88%, and 96%, respectively • Year 1 to Year 2 and Year 2 to Year 3 revenue retention were 122% and 143%, respectively Year 1 to Year 2 and Year 1 to Year 3 revenue per retained player have increased 39% and 49%, respectively • MUPS and ARPMUP disclosure proves less than 3 year payback periods ● • A state is unprofitable in its early years as we invest to acquire players ● ● ● ● ● State Level Economics ● As customer cohorts "stack," a state turns contribution profit positive after 2-3 years In later years, revenue and gross profit from earlier cohorts "stack" on top of each other, and advertising spend in that state declines as there are fewer untapped players within a state that have not joined already As customer and revenue retention rates persist, states generate substantially more profit in out years The state launch "J Curve" has changed as customer acquisition has accelerated in newly launched states NJ generated $68 million of contribution profit in FY 2021 We had 5 states that had positive contribution profit in FY 2021 We anticipate 5 more states will be contribution profit positive in FY 2022 More OSB customers per adult were acquired in AZ over its first two quarters than in NJ over its first eight quarters; informs economic model for new states Enterprise Economics As contribution profit positive states "stack", the company will turn profitable • When the contribution profit from more mature states exceeds the contribution profit from states that are still in investment phase, cumulative contribution profit will be positive • Our cost structure is right sized for growth. As scale is achieved, the gap between our absolute revenue growth and our absolute fixed cost growth will naturally widen resulting in operating leverage • We will be contribution profit positive for FY 2022 including all states where we are currently live If we had not launched any additional states after year end 2021, we expect that DraftKings would have been able to achieve EBITDA profitability in Q4 of 2022 • Based on all of the states we are currently in, and if legalization trends remain consistent with prior years, we would expect to be EBITDA positive in Q4 of FY 2023 | 25#26Gross profit payback period for a customer cohort is the number of years required for gross profit to exceed customer acquisition investment Cohort Gross Profit Payback Definition Cohort Payback Period of n Cohort Gross Profit Calculations Gross Profit Year 1 Gross Profit Year 2 Gross Profit Year 3 Cumulative Cohort Gross Profit After n Years Cohort Acquisition Spend Year 1 Net Revenue Year 2 Net Revenue® Year 3 Net Revenue" (1) Year 1 gross margin approximately 35%. (2) For cohorts with less than one year of data, Year 2 Net Revenue defined as Year 1 Net Revenue * Year 1 to Year 2 Revenue Retention Rate. (3) Year 2 gross margin approximately 45%. (4) For cohorts with less than two years of data, Year 3 Net Revenue defined as Year 2 Net Revenue *Year 2 to Year 3 Revenue Retention Rate. (5) Year 3 gross margin approximately 50%. * * * Customer Cohort Economics State Level Economics Zero Enterprise Economics (1) Year 1 Gross Margin % (3) Year 2 Gross Margin %Ⓡ (5) Year 3 Gross Margin % | 26#27>80% customer retention and >120% revenue retention year over year; revenue from retained customers more than doubles from Year 1 to Year 3 OSB and iGaming: Total Customer Retention (1) ● ● ● 73% Cumulative Customer Retention 83% i Year 1 (N = 41) Year 2 (N = 11) Year 3 (N = 2) Year 2 Revenue Indexed to Year 1 Year 3 Revenue Indexed to Year 2 (N = 11) (N = 2) Our customer retention improves every year of a cohort. These cohorts achieve > 100% revenue retention year over year as retained customers increase their spend on our platform As of FY 2021, we have 90 quarterly cohorts across 14 states (3) since launch of OSB in Q3 2018 41 of 90 cohorts have four or more consecutive full quarters of OSB and/or iGaming retention data • 30 of the 41 cohorts have between four and seven consecutive full quarters of OSB and/or iGaming data ("One Year Cohorts"), allowing us to measure Year 1 customer retention Nine of the 41 cohorts have between eight and eleven consecutive full quarters of OSB and/or iGaming data ("Two Year Cohorts"), allowing us to measure Year 1(4) customer retention, Year 2(5) customer retention, and Year 1 to Year 2 revenue retention ● 88% 70% 96% OSB and iGaming: Total Revenue Retention (²) Net Revenue Per Retained User Growth (vs. Prior Year) 100% (3) Excludes Oregon B2B. DraftKings Sportsbook replaced the Scoreboard app on January 18, 2022. (4) Year 1 is defined as the first 4 full quarters following a cohort's acquisition quarter. For example, Year 1 is Q1 2019 to Q4 2019 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. (5) Year 2 is defined as the 4 full quarters following a cohort's Year 1. For example, Year 2 is Q1 2020 to Q4 2020 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. (6) Year 3 is defined as the 4 full quarters following a cohort's Year 2. For example, Year 3 is Q1 2021 to Q4 2021 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. Customer Cohort Economics Year 1 Note: For further details on the definitions of customer retention and revenue retention and on the specific cohorts included in the analysis, refer to page 49 in the appendix of this presentation. (1) Includes OSB and iGaming customers for the 41 cohorts with four or more consecutive quarters of OSB and/or iGaming data. (2) Includes OSB and iGaming net revenue for the eleven cohorts with eight full quarters of OSB and/or iGaming data. State Level Economics 39% 122% Two of the 41 cohorts have twelve or more full quarters of OSB and/or iGaming data ("Three Year Cohorts"), allowing us to measure Year 1(4) customer retention, Year 2(5) customer retention, Year 3(6) customer retention, Year 1 to Year 2 revenue retention, and Year 2 to Year 3 revenue retention • Applying our experience with DFS cohorts to OSB and iGaming cohorts, customer retention is likely to increase every year and flatten out at ~100% 49% 143% Enterprise Economics | 27#28Cohort customer and revenue retention in OSB-only states is similar-to-better than customer and revenue retention in multi-product states Customer Cohort OSB Only: Total Customer Retention (1) ● Cumulative Customer Retention 88% ● 79% 90% Year 1 (N = 20) OSB Only: Total Revenue Retention (2) Net Revenue Per Retained User Growth (vs. Prior Year) 100% Economics State Level Economics Note: For further details on the definitions of customer retention and revenue retention and on the specific cohorts included in the analysis, refer to page 49 in the appendix of this presentation. (1) Includes OSB customers for the 20 cohorts with four or more consecutive quarters of OSB data. (2) Includes OSB net revenue for the two cohorts with eight full quarters of OSB data. (3) Excludes Oregon B2B. DraftKings Sportsbook replaced the Scoreboard app on January 18, 2022. (4) Year 1 is defined as the first 4 full quarters following a cohort's acquisition quarter. For example, Year 1 is Q1 2019 to Q4 2019 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. (5) Year 2 is defined as the 4 full quarters following a cohort's Year 1. For example, Year 2 is Q1 2020 to Q4 2020 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. 38% Year 2 (N = 2) Year 1 (N = 2) Year 2 Revenue Indexed to Year 1 (N = 2) Our customer retention improves every year of a cohort. These cohorts achieve >100% revenue retention year over year as retained customers increase their spend on our platform As of FY 2021, we have 90 quarterly cohorts across 14 states (3) since launch of OSB in Q3 2018 • 20 of 90 cohorts are in OSB only states and have four or more consecutive full quarters of OSB retention data • 18 of the 20 cohorts have between four and seven consecutive full quarters of OSB data ("One Year Cohorts"), allowing us to measure Year 1 customer retention Two of the 20 cohorts have between eight and eleven consecutive full quarters of OSB data ("Two Year Cohorts"), allowing us to measure Year 1(4) customer retention, Year 2(5) customer retention, and Year 1 to Year 2 revenue retention • Applying our experience with DFS cohorts to OSB and iGaming cohorts, customer retention is likely to increase every year and flatten out at ~100% 124% Enterprise Economics | 28#29Our strong retention is driven by acquiring quality customers, putting the customer first, cross selling, and continuous product improvement Retention Flywheel DRAFT KINGS g m Customer Cohort Economics State Level Economics Acquiring the right customers: Targeting high-quality customers is the first step in strong cohort performance Enterprise Economics Always putting the customer first: Customer centricity in everything we do drives best-in-class customer experience and customer service Cross selling: Data science and CRM drives frequency of play, player activation, and engagement across new products Driving continuous product innovation: Continuous iteration and improvement of products gives our customers more ways to play A | 29#30Gross margin leverage for a cohort is achieved over time due to promotional spend decreasing, economies of scale, and operational initiatives Cohort Level Gross Margin Improvement 1 2 3 4 Customer Cohort Economics State Level Economics Many of our variable costs are tied to gross revenue, not net revenue; therefore, as promotional rates decrease, gross margin increases Given that new customer promotions are richer than existing customer promotions, promotions as a percentage of GGR naturally decrease as we shift from acquisition investments to retention and cross-sell investments As we continue to grow revenue and deposit volume, certain variable costs decrease as a percentage of revenue due to pricing tiers that result in volume discounts Continuous focus on operational initiatives around platform costs, processing fees, and revenue share drives margin increase across all cohorts Enterprise Economics t | 30#31Our financial disclosures provide sufficient information to validate our payback periods on an LTM basis LTM Acquired Paid New Actives Calculation LTM Acquired Paid New Actives Customer Acquisition Cost Calculation Customer Acquisition Cost Gross Profit Payback Periods Approximate Payback Period (In Years) LTM MUPS Current Period Months Played Per Average Player LTM ARPMUP LTM MUPS Prior Period Customer Cohort Economics x 12 Months Per Year Acquisition Marketing Spend" Acquired Paid New Actives Player Retention Rate Customer Acquisition Cost Months Played Per Average Player State Level Economics Enterprise Economics LTM Gross Margin Note: See page 46 for example calculations for each LTM period in FY 2021. (1) Over the last four LTM periods, our variable acquisition marketing spend was 77% to 81% of our total marketing spend and on average 79%. We expect this percentage to be in the low 70s in 2022 and going forward as we invest in fixed S&M and mix into more efficient national media spend. | 31#32Using the previously outlined methodology, we can prove out sub three-year payback periods Payback Periods by Acquisition Period Based on Actual Results (Number of Years) LTM MUPS (Current Period) LTM MUPS (Prior Period) LTM ARPMUP LTM Gross Margin 2.8 Years LTM Q1 2021 1,089k 709k $56 53% 2.2 Years LTM Q2 2021 1,296k 669k $61 51% 2.5 Years LTM Q3 2021 1,376k 769k $62 48% Customer Cohort Economics State Level Economics 2.5 Years LTM Q4 2021 1,494k 883k $67 47% Note: Payback periods are calculated applying an 83% customer retention rate (see page 27 for reference) and assuming acquisition marketing spend to be 79% of total marketing spend. Over the last four LTM periods, our variable acquisition marketing spend was 77% to 81% of our total marketing spend and on average was 79%. We expect this percentage to be in the low 70s in 2022 and going forward as we invest in fixed S&M and mix into more efficient national media spend. Enterprise Economics | 32#33The result of strong payback periods is that states turn positive after two to three years Customer Cohort Economics State Level Economics DKNG State Launch and Profitability by State State NJ WV IN PA NH IA CO IL TN MI VA WY AZ CT NY LA OR 2018 Q3 2018 Launch 2019 Q3 2019 Launch Q4 2019 Launch Q4 2019 Launch Q4 2019 Launch 2020 Profitable Profitable Q1 2020 Launch Q2 2020 Launch Q3 2020 Launch Q4 2020 Launch Note: Does not include DFS or retail businesses. "Profitable" relates to contribution profit, which is a non-GAAP metric defined as gross profit less external marketing. 2021 Profitable Profitable Profitable Q1 2021 Launch Q1 2021 Launch Q3 2021 Launch Q3 2021 Launch Q4 2021 Launch 2022E Expected Profitable Expected Profitable Expected Profitable Expected Profitable Q1 2022 Launch Q1 2022 Launch Q1 2022 Launch Expected Profitable % Pop 2.7% 0.5% 2.1 % 3.9% 0.4 % 1.0% 1.8% 3.9 % 2.1 % 3.0 % 2.6 % 0.2 % 2.2 % 1.1 % 5.9 % 1.4% 1.3 % Enterprise Economics | 33#34NJ was highly profitable in its third full year; expect profitability to continue to ramp quickly in 2022 Customer Cohort Economics NGR and Contribution Profit - New Jersey ($ in millions) Contribution Margin $21 (48)% ($10) Launch Year (2018 A) $85 Year 1 (2019 A) (6)% ($5) Net Revenue Contribution Profit Note: Does not include DFS or retail businesses. Contribution profit is a non-GAAP metric that reflects gross profit less external marketing. $153 Year 2 (2020 A) 5% $8 $239 State Level Economics Year 3 (2021 A) $68 Enterprise Economics | 34#351 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Increased sales and marketing spend due to unprecedented number of new players at a historically lower cost per acquired player Acquired and Cumulative Gaming Customers Over Time 2 Aug-18 Oct-18 Dec-18 Feb-19 Apr-19 Jun-19 Aug-19 Select State Launch Commentary Acquired Gaming Customers (1) 3 Note: Acquired gaming customers and cumulative gaming customers do not have the same Y axis scale. (1) First time DraftKings OSB and/or iGaming players acquired in each month. (2) Cumulative DraftKings OSB and/or iGaming players since OSB launch in August 2018. Cumulative Gaming Customers(2) Oct-19 Dec-19 Feb-20 Apr-20 Jun-20 الأبناء Aug-20 6 Oct-20 Customer Cohort Economics State Level Economics iii. DKNG launches NJ OSB in August 2018 and NJ iGaming in December 2018 DKNG launches WV OSB in August 2019 DKNG launches IN OSB and PA OSB in October 2019 and November 2019, respectively DKNG launches IL OSB in August 2020; start of first full NFL season for OSB states representing ~13% of the U.S. population (i.e., IN, PA, NH, IA, CO, and IL) DKNG launches TN OSB in November 2020 7 8 Dec-20 Feb-21 Apr-21 Jun-21 Aug-21 Oct-21 Dec-21 DKNG launches MI OSB and iGaming and VA OSB in January 2021 DKNG launches WY OSB and AZ OSB in September 2021; start of first full NFL season for OSB states representing ~10% of the U.S. population (i.e., TN, MI, VA, AZ, and WY) DKNG launches CT OSB and iGaming in October 2021 Enterprise Economics | 35#36We are acquiring customers much faster than before; more OSB customers per adult acquired in AZ over two quarters than in NJ over eight quarters Cumulative Acquired OSB Customers Per Adult(¹) Over Time Increased marketing spend vs. original state launch playbook at lower CPA First Quarter We acquired ~3.5% of AZ's adult population in our first two quarters with OSB, compared to ~1.3% in our first two quarters with OSB in NJ Second Quarter NJ (Actuals) (²) Third Quarter Fourth Quarter (1) Cumulative acquired OSB players per adult defined as distinct DraftKings users who played OSB in each respective state divided by the adult population in that state. (2) Cumulative DraftKings OSB players per adult acquired in New Jersey; note New Jersey represents 2.7% of the U.S. adult population. (3) Cumulative DraftKings OSB players per adult acquired in Arizona; note Arizona represents 2.2% of the U.S. adult population. AZ (Actuals) (3) Fifth Quarter I I 1 Sixth Quarter 1 Customer Cohort Economics Seventh Quarter State Level Economics I Enterprise Economics Eighth Quarter | 36#37If no new states launch for the rest of FY 2022, we expect to be contribution profit positive this year FY 2021 Contribution Profit Build Already Contribution Profit Positive (1) Not Yet Contribution Profit Positive(1) Cumulative Contribution Profit Negative FY 2021 contribution profit was predominantly due to investing in customer acquisition for states that launched in 2021 or early 2022 (1) Includes contribution profit from across the B2C platform. FY 2022 Contribution Profit Build Already Contribution Profit Positive (1) Customer Cohort Economics Not Yet Contribution Profit Positive(1) State Level Economics Cumulative Contribution Profit Enterprise Economics Contribution profit turns positive as we shift from focusing on customer acquisition to customer retention and realize operating leverage in more mature states | 37#38DRAFT KINGS ENTERPRISE ECONOMICS ARE EEE a de#39Expected gross margin rate has come down by ~200bps primarily due to NY Illustrative State Level Unit Economics (Expected Year 5), Blended OSB and iGaming Average (1) (% of Net Revenue) 100% Net Revenue (27)% Taxes Most states acting rationally with tax rates to maximize tax revenues and enable competitive offerings versus the illegal offshore market (5)% Platform Migration to in-house bet engine complete Continue to move to in-house games that improve GM% (8)% Processing Initiatives underway to improve payment processor mix, renegotiate rates, and decrease deposit to withdrawal ratio (4)% Revenue Share Ability to renegotiate with existing skin providers Strong and mutually beneficial relationships with skin providers 56% Gross Margin Note: Cost buckets represent expected year 5 population weighted average across our 18 multi-operator states and provinces with legalized OSB or iGaming. Excludes any contribution from DFS which has -80% gross margin. Including DFS, expected gross margin for the enterprise is -58%. (1) Includes 18 multi-operator OSB states and provinces and 6 multi-operator iGaming states and provinces. Taking an average across these states appropriately reflects that we will likely be live in more OSB states than OSB and iGaming states at maturity. States included in build are the following: NJ (OSB and iGaming), CO, IL, IN, IA, PA (OSB and iGaming), WV (OSB and iGaming), TN, MI (OSB and iGaming), VA, WY, AZ, LA, OH, MD, ON (OSB and iGaming), NY, and CT (OSB and iGaming). | 39#40Long-term external marketing scale will be achieved through decreasing customer acquisition spend and optimizing our CACs Long-Term External Marketing Spend 1 2 3 External marketing is primarily a product of customer acquisition in newly launched OSB and iGaming states and provinces Applying current CACs to assumed annual customer acquisition at maturity accounts for more than 90% of the decrease from current external marketing spend to long- term external marketing spend The remaining decrease in spend is due to optimizing CACs; optimization is due to a variety of factors, the most notable being mix shift into more efficient national advertising from local advertising | 40#41Expected long-term SG&A will comfortably be in the mid-to-high teens as a percentage of net revenue Long-Term SG&A 1 2 3 4 Short-term cost growth due to unique North American online gaming industry dynamics; pulled forward staffing to launch states and be competitive with at scale global peers Expect to see a meaningful slowdown in SG&A growth starting in 2023 Most of our SG&A costs do not require growth as we expand into newly launched states and provinces SG&A as a percentage of net revenue for at scale online gaming players is typically in the mid teens | 41#42Increasing long-term Adjusted EBITDA estimate to $2.1B before GNOG synergies, Marketplace, Media, and any other new initiatives ($ in billions) At 64% of Canada Population Legalized At 30% of U.S. Population Legalized At 65% of U.S. Population Legalized Canada(2) Other(¹) ● iGaming(3) Online Sports Book(4) DFS $6.7 $0.1 $ 0.4 $ 2.5 $3.3 $0.4 $(2.8) Net Revenue $3.9 COGS External Marketing Assumes 65% of U.S. population has live OSB and 30% of U.S. population has live iGaming, and then rolls forward 5 years to “maturity" • Assumes DKNG has 25% and 22.5% share in U.S. OSB and U.S. iGaming, respectively Assumes 64% of Canada population legalizes OSB and iGaming and DKNG achieves 15% share across OSB and iGaming • Does not include any revenue or costs associated with GNOG synergies, Marketplace, Media, and any other new initiatives $(0.7) Gross Profit $3.2 Assumes 64% of Canadian population has access to legalized OSB and iGaming with DraftKings achieving 15% share. Net of promotional allowances (22% of gross revenues). Assumes 30% of U.S. population has access to legalized iGaming with DraftKings achieving 22.5% share. Net of promotional allowances (22% of gross revenues). Contribution Profit $(1.1) SG&A(5 $ 2.1 Notes: Does not include $300mm in projected long-term EBITDA synergies from the announced acquisition of GNOG. -$200mm of the projected synergies are attributable to GNOG revenue uplift (improved marketing and CRM efficacy) and gross margin rate improvement (GNOG migrating to the DKNG technology platform). The remaining -$100mm of projected synergies are predominantly external marketing and some SG&A savings. Achievement of any projected synergies is subject to the closing of the previously announced acquisition of GNOG. (1) Includes B2B and retail revenue streams. (2) (3) (4) (5) Assumes 65% of U.S. population has access to legalized sports betting with DraftKings achieving 25% share. Net of promotional allowances (22% of gross revenues). Based on bottoms up build from internal management plan and analysis of fixed vs. variable vs. semi-variable cost centers. SG&A includes compensation and non-compensation costs for Sales & Marketing, Product & Technology, and G&A expenses. Adjusted EBITDA | 42#43DRAFT KINGS MARKETPLACE ARE Berli a de#44DKNG has had early success with its NFT marketplace and has a clear right to play in the space based on customer overlap; early innings of industry show massive TAM potential DraftKings Marketplace Overview 115k Unique Marketplace Customers in 5 Months(1) All drops (110) Sold out in 2021 LTM NFT Secondary Sales and Monthly Unique Buyers (4) ($ in millions) Monthly Unique Buyers(5) 23k $86 50k $449 103k $835 163k $1,089 Mar-21 Apr-21 ~20% Cross Sell Of Customers Acquired on Marketplace to DFS, OSB, iGaming 226k $1,377 Launching Gamified NFT Collaboration with NFLPA May-21 282k $1,700 Jun-21 369k $2,829 Jul-21 490k $7,320 Aug-21 610k $10,536 Jan-21 Feb-21 Source: Internal DraftKings data and Cryptoslam.io (1) DraftKings Marketplace launched in August 2021. (2) Internal DraftKings CRM Database Analysis (online survey fielded June 21 to July 6, 2021, prior to DraftKings Marketplace launch), Current DraftKings Players Active in past 6 months, n=788. Q: Please indicate whether or not each of these describes you: I have bought cryptocurrency. (3) Internal Twitter Lifestyle Analysis, June 2021. (4) Calculated from transactions on all marketplaces tracked by CryptoSlam and only includes owner-to-owner sales (not initial sales from the product directly to the owners). (5) Calculated as the average monthly unique buyers tracked by CrytptoSlam over the LTM period. 40%+ DKNG Customers Bought Crypto or NFTs in Last Twelve Months(²) Sep-21 6.6x more likely @DraftKings Followers to Tweet About NFTS Versus Average U.S. Twitter User(³) 762k $13,386 Oct-21 932k $16,097 Nov-21 1081k $18,605 Dec-21 | 44#45DRAFT KINGS APPENDIX သီချင်း ARE EEE a de#46Financial disclosures and example payback period calculations LTM Q4 2021 B2C Net Revenue ($ in mm) ARPMUP Enterprise GM% All-in Adj. Marketing Spend ($ in mm) 79% of Marketing Spend ($ in mm) LTM Q4 2020 MUPS (k) LTM Q4 2021 MUPS (k) Net Adds (k) Gross Adds @ 17% Churn (k) LTM Q3 2021 B2C Net Revenue ($ in mm) ARPMUP Enterprise GM% All-in Adj. Marketing Spend ($ in mm) 79% of Marketing Spend ($ in mm) LTM Q3 2020 MUPS (k) LTM Q3 2021 MUPS (k) Net Adds (k) Gross Adds @ 17% Churn (k) LTM Q2 2021 B2C Net Revenue ($ in mm) ARPMUP Enterprise GM% All-in Adj. Marketing Spend ($ in mm) 79% of Marketing Spend ($ in mm) LTM Q2 2020 MUPS (k) LTM Q2 2021 MUPS (k) Net Adds (k) Gross Adds @ 17% Churn (k) LTM Q1 2021 B2C Net Revenue ($ in mm) ARPMUP Enterprise GM% All-in Adj. Marketing Spend ($ in mm) 79% of Marketing Spend ($ in mm) LTM Q1 2020 MUPS (K) LTM Q1 2021 MUPs (k) Net Adds (k) Gross Adds @ 17% Churn (k) $1,199 $67 47% $929 $734 883 1,494 611 761 $1,031 $62 48% $850 $672 769 1,376 607 737 $945 51% $752 $594 669 1,296 627 741 $731 $56 53% $638 $504 709 1,089 380 500 Months Played 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Months Played 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Months Played 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Months Played 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 New MUPS (k) 761 761 761 761 761 761 761 761 761 New MUPS (k) 737 737 737 737 737 737 737 737 737 New MUPS (k) 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 741 New MUPS (k) 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 Implied New Actives (k) 4,564 3,043 2,282 1,826 1,521 1,304 1,141 1,014 913 Implied New Actives (k) 4,424 2,949 2,212 1,770 1,475 1,264 1,106 983 885 Implied New Actives (k) 4,443 2,222 1,777 1,481 1,270 1,111 987 889 Implied New Actives (k) 3,002 2,001 1,501 1,201 1,001 858 750 667 600 Notes: Includes all B2C revenue from OSB, iGaming, DFS, and other. Implied new actives (k) = (12/ Months played) * New MUPS (k). Implied CAC ($) $161 $241 $322 $402 $482 $563 $643 $724 $804 Implied CAC ($) $152 $228 $304 $379 $455 $531 $607 $683 $759 Implied CAC ($) $134 $201 $267 $334 $401 $468 $535 $602 $669 Implied CAC ($) $168 $252 $336 $420 $504 $588 $672 $756 $840 ARPMUP ($) $67 $67 $67 $67 $67 $67 $67 $67 $67 ARPMUP ($) $62 $62 $62 $62 $62 $62 $62 $62 $62 ARPMUP ($) $61 $61 $61 $61 $61 $61 $61 $61 $61 ARPMUP ($) $56 $56 $56 $56 $56 $56 $56 $56 $56 Revenue / New Active ($) $134 $201 $267 $334 $401 $468 $535 $602 $669 Revenue / New Active ($) $125 $187 $250 $312 $375 $437 $500 $562 $624 Revenue / New Active ($) $122 $182 $243 $304 $365 $426 $486 $547 $608 Revenue / New Active ($) $112 $168 $224 $280 $336 $392 $448 $504 $560 GM% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% 47% GM% 48% 48% 48% 48% 48% 48% 48% 48% 48% GM% 51% 51% 51% 51% 51% 51% 51% 51% GM% 53% 53% 53% 53% 53% 53% 53% 53% 53% GP ($)/ New Paid Active $63 $95 $127 $159 $190 $222 $254 $286 $317 GP ($)/ New Paid Active $60 $90 $121 $151 $181 $211 $241 $271 $302 GP ($)/ New Paid Active $62 $93 $124 $155 $186 $217 $248 $279 $310 GP ($)/ New Paid Active $59 $89 $119 $149 $178 $208 $238 $267 $297 Payback Period 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years Payback Period 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years 2.5 Years Payback Period 2.2 Years Years 2.2 Years 2.2 Years 2.2 Years 2.2 Years 2.2 Years 2.2 Years 2.2 Years Payback Period 2.8 Years 2.8 Years 2.8 Years 2.8 Years 2.8 Years 2.8 Years 2.8 Years 2.8 Years 2.8 Years | 46#47Reconciliation of GAAP Operating Expenses to Non-GAAP Operating Expenses FY 2020 to FY 2021 Operating Expenses Reconciliation ($ in millions) GAAP Operating Expenses Cost of Revenue Sales and Marketing General and Administrative Product and Technology Total GAAP Operating Expenses Pro-Forma Operating Expense Adjustments Cost of Revenue Sales and Marketing General and Administrative Product and Technology Total Pro-Forma Operating Expense Adjustments Non-GAAP Operating Expense Adjustments Cost of Revenue Sales and Marketing General and Administrative Product and Technology Total Non-GAAP Operating Expense Adjustments Adjusted Pro-Forma Operating Expenses Cost of Revenue Sales and Marketing General and Administrative Product and Technology Total Adjusted Operating Expenses (a) (b) (d) (a) (d) (a) (c) (d) (e) (f) (a) (d) 31-Dec-21 $253 $278 $241 $70 $842 ($1) ($20) ($9) ($15) ($0) ($142) ($10) ($1) ($1) ($13) ($26) ($1) ($241) $223 $263 $74 $42 $601 30-Sep-21 $171 $304 $220 $65 $759 ($2) ($20) ($7) ($14) ($0) ($134) ($4) ($1) ($5) ($18) ($26) ($1) ($233) $142 $289 $58 $38 $526 30-Jun-21 $187 $171 $199 $63 $619 ($1) ($21) ($7) ($14) ($0) ($132) ($8) ($1) ($4) ($13) ($25) ($1) ($226) $159 $157 $41 $36 $393 31-Mar-21 $183 $229 $169 $56 $637 ($1) ($19) ($7) ($9) ($0) ($122) ($3) ($1) ($1) ($2) ($20) ($1) ($186) $157 $220 $41 $34 $452 31-Dec-20 $159 $192 $173 $66 $591 ($1) ($18) ($6) ($7) ($0) ($116) ($2) ($1) ($1) ($1) ($25) ($2) ($180) $134 $184 $52 $39 $410 30-Sep-20 $97 $203 $127 $54 $481 ($0) ($19) ($6) ($12) ($0) ($83) ($4) ($1) ($2) ($2) ($22) ($1) ($151) $72 $191 $36 $31 $330 30-Jun-20 $47 $46 $107(1) $31 $231 $6 $1 $9 $6 $22 ($0) ($18) ($4) ($3) ($0) ($54) ($25)(1) ($1) ($2) ($3) ($8) ($1) ($119) $32 $43 $33 $27 $135 31-Mar-20 $43 $54 $39(1) $18 $155 $25 $4 $5 $12 $46 ($18) ($4) ($0) ($0) ($4) ($6)(1) ($1) ($1) ($0) ($0) ($1) ($35) $47 $57 $33 $28 $165 (a) Stock-based compensation expense Amortization of acquired intangible assets (b) (c) Transaction expenses (d) Depreciation & Amortization (e) Litigation (f) Other Note: Numbers may not foot due to rounding. (1) Pursuant to the principles of Article 11 of Regulation S-X, the transaction costs related to the Business Combination have been eliminated in calculating our Pro-Forma Operating Expenses in Proforma Adjusted EBITDA tables in our 10K for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020. These costs were approximately $31mm for the year ended December 31, 2020 and are included in our GAAP Operating Expenses on this page. | 47#48Reconciliation of GAAP Operating Expenses to Non-GAAP Operating Expenses FY 2020 to FY 2021 EBITDA Build ($ in millions) Net Revenue Cost of Revenue Gross Profit Memo: Gross Margin Sales and Marketing Product and Technology General and Administrative Adjusted EBITDA Note: Numbers may not foot due to rounding. 1Q20 $113 $47 $66 59% $57 $28 $33 ($52) 2Q20 $75 $32 $43 57% $43 $27 $33 ($60) 3Q20 $133 $72 $61 46% $191 $31 $36 ($197) 4Q20 $322 $134 $188 58% $184 $39 $52 ($88) 2020 $644 $285 $359 56% $475 $125 $154 ($396) 1Q21 $312 $157 $155 50% $220 $34 $41 ($139) 2Q21 $298 $159 $139 47% $157 $36 $41 ($95) 3Q21 $213 $142 $71 33% $289 $38 $58 ($314) 4Q21 $473 $223 $250 53% $263 $42 $74 ($128) 2021 $1,296 $681 $615 47% $929 $150 $214 ($676) | 48#49Detailed overview of methodology for cohort customer retention and revenue retention Acquisition Quarter, Consecutive Full Quarters of Data Acquired Cohort Q3 2018 Q4 2019 Q1 2019 . . State NJ WV IN PA NH IA 8 CO Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q4 2020 Q3 2018 Acq. Q4 2018 1 Acq. Q1 2019 2 1 Acq. Q2 2019 3 2 1 Acq. Q3 2019 4 3 2 1 Acq. Acq. Q4 2019 5 4 3 2 1 Acq. 1 Acq. Acq. Acq. Acq. Q1 2020 6 5 4 3 2 1 Acq. 2 1 Acq. 1 Acq. 1 Acq. 1 Acq. Acq. Q2 2020 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Acq. 3 2 1 Acq. 2 1 Acq. 2 1 Acq. 2 1 Acq. 1 Acq. Acq. Q3 2020 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Acq. 4 3 2 1 Acq. 3 2 1 Acq. 3 2 1 Acq. 3 2 1 Acq. 2 Acq. 1 Acq. Acq. Q4 2020 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Acq. 5 4 3 2 1 Acq. 4 3 2 1 Acq. 4 3 2 1 Acq. 4 3 2 1 Acq. 3 2 1 Acq. 2 1 Acq. 1 IL TN Year 1 is defined as the first 4 full quarters following a cohort's acquisition quarter. For example, Year 1 is Q1 2019 to Q4 2019 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. Year 2 is defined as the 4 full quarters following a cohort's Year 1. For example, Year 2 is Q1 2020 to Q4 2020 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. Year 3 is defined as the 4 full quarters following a cohort's Year 2. For example, Year 2 would be Q1 2021 to Q4 2021 for a customer acquired in Q4 2018. Customer retention is defined as the percentage of the prior year's customers who return to play the following year Year 1 customer retention is defined as the percent of the initial cohort that played again in the 4 quarters following the cohort's acquisition quarter Year 2 customer retention is defined as the percent of the cohort that played in Year 1 that returned to play again in Year 2. Year 2 customer retention rates include customers who churned in Year 1 and re-activated in Year 2 Year 3 customer retention is defined as the percent of the cohort that played in Year 2 that returned to play again in Year 3. Year 3 customer retention rates include customers who churned in Year 1 or 2 and re-activated in Year 3 Revenue retention is defined as a cohort's net revenue in a given year divided by the same cohort's net revenue in the previous year Acq. Acq. Q1 2021 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 4 3 2 1 3 2 1 2 1 1 Q2 2021 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 One Year Cohorts Two Year Cohorts 3 2 7 6 5 4 3 2 6 5 4 3 2 6 5 4 3 2 6 5 4 3 2 5 4 3 2 4 3 2 3 2 2 Three Year Cohorts Q3 2021 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 8 7 6 5 4 3 7 6 5 4 3 7 6 5 4 3 7 6 5 4 3 6 5 4 3 5 4 3 4 3 3 Q4 2021 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 9 8 7 6 5 4 8 7 6 5 4 8 7 6 5 4 8 7 6 5 4 7 6 5 4 6 5 4 5 4 4 | 49#50There are five OSB state reporting methods, each with differing levels of visibility Method 1 Method 2 Method 3 Method 4 Method 5 Description Handle, GGR, and NGR are reported by operator Handle and GGR are reported by operator Handle and GGR are reported by license, which may be shared by multiple operators GGR is reported by license, which may be shared by multiple operators Only data for the total state is available Note: TN and VA have irregularly reported operator-specific results in the past. It is unclear if they will report operator-specific results in the future. States PA, MI, AZ, and CT IN, NH, IL, NY, and OR WV and IA NJ CO, TN, VA, WY, and LA | 50