Pickleball Is Still Growing—Just No Longer at Its Breakneck Pace

Yes, pickleball growth is slowing in the United States, but participation is not yet declining. SFIA reported that pickleball participation increased 1.3% in the first half of 2026 Report: Is U.S. Pickleball Participation Leveling Off? – The Dink Pickleball. Because that result covers only half the year, it is an early signal rather than proof of a lasting plateau or downturn, according to SFIA’s first midyear participation update.

The short answer: growth is slowing, not reversing

A positive growth rate means the estimated player population was still expanding. The distinction is straightforward:

• Deceleration means participation is increasing at a slower rate.
• A plateau means participation is approximately unchanged.
• Contraction means the number of participants has fallen.

The first-half 2026 result fits the first category. It does not show that pickleball lost players nationally or that the sport has reached saturation.

The change is nevertheless substantial because the preceding expansion was exceptional. Pickleball recorded double-digit annual gains for several years, so a low-single-digit partial-year increase represents a sharp shift in momentum. The defensible conclusion is that the boom is moderating—not that it has already ended.

The participation timeline behind the slowdown

SFIA’s estimated U.S. pickleball population rose from ~4.2 million in 2020 to ~24.3 million in 2025. Participation increased 22.8% during 2025, when pickleball remained SFIA’s fastest-growing tracked U.S. sport for a fifth consecutive year, according to the 2026 SFIA Pickleball Single Sport Report announcement.

The timeline separates estimated player totals from annual percentage changes. The first-half 2026 result is listed separately because it is not a completed annual rate.

Period	Estimated U.S. players	Reported change	Measurement
2020	~4.2 million	—	Five-year baseline
2022	~8.9 million	85.7%	Full-year annual growth
2023	~13.6 million	~52%	Full-year annual growth
2024	~19.8 million	45.8%	Full-year annual growth
2025	~24.3 million	22.8%	Final full-year estimate
First half of 2026	No full-year total available	1.3%	Partial-year increase

The 2022–2024 annual rates are drawn from a Pickleheads secondary summary of SFIA data, rather than from the supplied SFIA releases. Secondary accounts differ slightly on the 2023 rate, so ~52% is the more useful rounded figure.

Two trends are visible. First, pickleball added a large number of participants over five years. Second, its percentage growth rate had already fallen from the extraordinary 2022 level before the much slower first-half 2026 result.

That does not create a contradiction. A sport can continue adding players while its rate of expansion declines. What the timeline cannot establish is a final 2026 total, because the last row covers a different measurement period.

Why 1.3% and 22.8% are not an apples-to-apples comparison

The 22.8% figure describes the completed 2025 participation year. The 1.3% figure covers only the first half of 2026. Putting them side by side illustrates the apparent slowdown, but they should not be treated as equivalent annual measurements.

In particular, the 1.3% result should not be doubled, annualized or used to calculate a 2026 player total.

The previous year shows why that caution matters. A preliminary midyear estimate put 2025 participation growth at 14.7% and the player population at ~22.7 million. The final full-year estimate was instead 22.8% growth and ~24.3 million players. The preliminary and final figures are not interchangeable.

SFIA’s totals are also survey estimates, not a census or registration count. An account of the preliminary 2025 update said the estimates were based on roughly 20,000 nationwide online interviews weighted for variables including age, gender, income, ethnicity, household size, region and population density. It also noted that seasonal patterns could change the early numbers, according to The Dink’s report on the SFIA update.

The supplied SFIA releases do not publish uncertainty intervals. That makes the broad direction more informative than treating a small percentage change as an exact head count. Full-year 2026 data will be needed to distinguish durable moderation from a temporary or seasonal result.

A slower percentage can still mean millions of additional players

Percentage growth and absolute growth answer different questions. The percentage measures change relative to the previous player base; the absolute difference shows how much the reported total changed.

SFIA estimates increased from ~19.8 million players in 2024 to ~24.3 million in 2025—a difference of roughly 4.5 million. That was a substantial net increase even though the 22.8% growth rate was lower than the annual rates reported for 2022, 2023 and 2024.

The 4.5 million difference should not be described as gross new-player acquisition. Annual totals do not reveal how many people tried pickleball for the first time, resumed playing or stopped playing during the year. They show the net difference between two survey estimates.

The 2025 category breakdown indicates that growth extended beyond occasional trial. Casual participation—playing one to seven times annually—reached ~16.8 million and increased 23.9% year over year. Core participation—playing at least eight times annually—reached ~7.5 million and grew 20.4%, according to a summary of SFIA’s 2026 participation report.

Growth in both groups suggests participation was still broadening among occasional and more frequent players through 2025.

That distinction will matter more as the sport matures. A stable player population that plays more frequently can place greater pressure on courts than a larger population that plays once or twice per year. Conversely, a rising headline total can conceal weaker retention if growth is concentrated among occasional participants.

A larger starting population also changes the arithmetic: the same absolute addition produces a smaller percentage increase when measured against a bigger base. That explains how lower percentage growth can coexist with millions of additional participants, but it does not prove that the larger base caused the slowdown.

Court inventory is growing more slowly too—but it measures something different

Recorded public-court supply is also expanding more slowly in major cities. Pickleball-court inventory in parks across the 100 most populous U.S. cities increased 4% from 2025 to 2026, compared with 13% growth in 2025 and 14% in 2024, based on Trust for Public Land data reported by Axios.

The inventory still increased; it did not decline. But these figures should not automatically be described as new-court construction. The count includes courts striped for both tennis and pickleball and may reflect dedicated additions, conversions or restriping.

Its geographic scope is also narrow. The dataset covers parks in the 100 largest U.S. cities, not every private club, indoor facility, suburban complex, rural court or commercial venue. It therefore cannot represent total nationwide pickleball infrastructure.

An inventory count also says little about practical capacity. It does not measure:

• Peak-hour occupancy or wait times
• Court condition and maintenance closures
• Lighting, weather exposure or operating hours
• The reliability of shared-use access
• Player retention or visit frequency

Axios identified tighter municipal budgets, aging infrastructure and competing recreation priorities as possible influences on slower expansion. The data do not establish any of those factors as the cause, nor do they show that national player interest has weakened.

Court supply and participation can move at different speeds. Public projects require budgets, planning and land-use decisions, while private operators face separate financing and demand conditions. The two datasets currently show a similar pattern—continued growth at a slower pace—but they measure different parts of the market.

A metric-by-metric scorecard shows a maturing market

Participation surveys estimate how many people play. Membership counts track affiliation with an organization. Location databases record known places to play. Tournament totals measure one channel of competitive activity. None can substitute for the others.

USA Pickleball reported that membership rose from 62,260 in 2024 to 104,828 in 2025, while sanctioned tournaments moved from 142 to 144. The Pickleheads database added more than 2,300 locations during 2025, reaching 18,258, according to the USA Pickleball Annual Growth Report.

Metric	Latest direction	Scope	What it establishes
Participation	Growing more slowly	SFIA’s first-half 2026 U.S. estimate	Continued growth, but no final 2026 rate or total
Recorded locations	Up by 2,300+ to 18,258	Pickleheads database	More recorded locations, not necessarily all newly built
USA Pickleball membership	Up from 62,260 to 104,828	One governing body	Organizational growth, not total participation
Sanctioned tournaments	Nearly flat at 144 versus 142	USA Pickleball events	Activity in one competitive channel

Membership growth can reflect recruitment, benefits, programming or tournament access and should not be applied to the national player population. Likewise, a location newly added to a database may have existed before it was recorded.

USA Pickleball also reported lower ambassador counts, equipment approvals, and manufacturer and brand registrations in 2025. Those are mixed organizational and supplier indicators, not direct measures of player demand.

Collectively, the figures are consistent with normalization across parts of the pickleball ecosystem. Participation and recorded locations continued increasing, membership rose sharply, and sanctioned tournament volume was approximately stable. The scorecard does not show a sport shrinking nationally.

What to watch before calling the boom over

Full-year 2026 participation is the most important next figure. A positive annual result would confirm continued expansion, even if the rate remained far below the boom years. An approximately unchanged total would support a plateau interpretation, while a lower total would provide evidence of contraction within the SFIA series.

Separate casual- and core-player trends will add needed context. If casual growth slows while the core population expands, existing players may be becoming more engaged. If core participation declines, weaker frequency or retention could be developing beneath the headline total.

Facility operators and municipalities should also rely on local operating data rather than treating a national rate as a demand forecast. Useful measures include:

• Peak and off-peak occupancy
• Wait times and unfulfilled booking requests
• Repeat visits and retention
• Revenue per court-hour
• Lesson, league and open-play participation
• Dedicated versus shared-use capacity
• Maintenance closures and usable hours

Brands and leagues face a similar measurement problem. Total players do not automatically predict paddle replacement cycles, lesson bookings, league registrations or tournament entries. Those outcomes increasingly depend on how often existing participants play.

Slower nationwide growth can coexist with court shortages in one market and excess capacity in another.

For now, the evidence supports a careful yes: explosive U.S. pickleball growth is moderating, but there is not yet evidence of a national participation contraction.

How many people played pickleball in the United States in 2025?

SFIA estimated that ~24.3 million Americans played pickleball in 2025, an increase of 22.8% from 2024. The total included ~7.5 million core participants who played at least eight times during the year, as reported in SFIA’s 2026 pickleball report announcement.

These are survey estimates tied to SFIA’s definitions and methodology, not registration totals or a census of every player.

Do SFIA and APP pickleball player estimates measure the same thing?

No. SFIA and the Association of Pickleball Professionals have published substantially different U.S. player estimates. The available comparison says they use different methodologies, but it does not provide enough detail to reconcile their definitions, sampling and reference periods precisely.

For that reason, their totals should not be combined into one trend line. Growth should be measured consistently within one methodology, or the two estimates should be presented separately with their definitions and survey methods clearly labeled.