How We Rate Casinos
Every casino reviewed on this site is evaluated across seven categories, each weighted to reflect its practical importance to a player’s experience. Below is a full explanation of how each category works and what we’re actually measuring.
Licensing and Security (20%)
We verify the licence number directly with the issuing authority. We check that SSL encryption is active across the full domain, not just the login page. We assess the quality of the issuing regulator — an MGA licence and a Curaçao licence are not equivalent, and we note that distinction explicitly. We also look for third-party game audit certifications from bodies such as eCOGRA, iTech Labs, or BMM Testlabs. An operator with a verified licence from a credible authority and an independent game audit scores highest in this category.
Payments and Withdrawal Testing (20%)
This is the category most review sites skip. We open real accounts, make real deposits, and process real withdrawals. We document the time from withdrawal request to funds arriving in the payment account, any documentation requested during the process, and whether the experience matched what the operator’s terms stated. We test at least two payment methods per operator — typically one e-wallet and one crypto option. Unexplained delays, undisclosed fees, or KYC surprises that weren’t clearly signposted during registration all reduce the score here.
Game Selection and Software Providers (15%)
We assess the breadth and depth of the game library, the credibility of the software providers represented, and whether games load consistently across desktop and mobile. We note the availability of content restricted on UKGC sites — bonus buy features, certain slot mechanics — where relevant, and verify that published RTP figures for reviewed titles match documented provider data.
Bonus Terms and Fairness (15%)
We read the full bonus terms document, not just the headline offer. Wagering requirements, maximum bet whilst on bonus, game contribution rates, cashout caps, time limits, and forfeiture conditions are all assessed. We score not just on generosity but on transparency — a 35x wagering requirement stated clearly is better than a 25x requirement buried in scroll-length small print. Offers that appear too generous relative to the economics of the operator are treated as a red flag, not a positive.
Customer Support (15%)
We test live chat at multiple times of day including outside standard business hours. We submit both simple and complex queries — payment timelines, bonus rule edge cases, account verification questions — and document the accuracy and speed of responses. We also test email response times. Operators lose points for scripted deflection, inaccurate information, or support that becomes unreachable when a problem arises.
Responsible Gambling Tools (10%)
We assess whether the operator provides deposit limits, loss limits, session time controls, cooling-off periods, and a self-exclusion mechanism — and whether these tools are accessible in the account dashboard without needing to contact support to activate them. We also check whether the site links to external support organisations. This category is scored independently of licence level — a Curaçao-licensed operator can score well here if the tools are genuinely implemented and functional.
User Experience (5%)
Site performance on desktop and mobile, navigation logic, search and filter functionality in the game lobby, account management clarity, and registration flow quality. This category carries the lowest weight because UX preferences are subjective — but a platform that is genuinely difficult to use or performs poorly on mobile warrants a note regardless.
Final scores are calculated across all seven categories and reviewed by both team members before publication. We do not round up scores to produce a more attractive rating, and we do not suppress low scores to protect relationships with operators. A score is the score our testing produced.