How we review

Methodology

Our pages are built by separating three things that casino coverage usually blends together: what the operator publishes about itself, what can be observed in its own public interface and configuration, and what simply isn’t published anywhere. Operator figures — game counts, payout speeds, bonus ceilings — are quoted and attributed as claims, with contradictions between them left visible rather than quietly resolved. Where the operator contradicts itself, we name both figures.

Where a detail isn’t published — a wagering multiplier, a per-coin minimum, an RTP figure, a fee schedule — we say so explicitly and point to where it is shown live, rather than printing a plausible-looking number we cannot source. Blockchain confirmation windows and similar general mechanics are described as typical ranges, clearly framed as properties of the network rather than promises from the casino. We do not claim to have registered, deposited or withdrawn at this operator, and no timing figure on this site is presented as a measurement we took.

Corrections policy

If you spot outdated information — a changed minimum deposit, a bonus term that no longer matches what's shown at claim, or a broken link — contact us via the contact page. Corrections are applied directly to the affected page; material changes are noted with an updated date at the top of the page.

What we don't do

We don’t invent payout percentages, RTP figures, deposit minimums or licensing claims we can’t confirm, and we don’t narrate first-hand testing we haven’t done. Where a figure is a typical range rather than a guaranteed number — crypto network confirmation times, for instance — the page says “typical” or “usually”, not a fixed guarantee. When we find that an earlier version of one of our own pages asserted something unsourced, we remove it and say so on the page. This edition is written for readers wherever you are, and the same standards apply to every market we cover.