Methodology
How we rate casinos and sportsbooks
Every operator on this site goes through the same 26-point review, scored against weights we fix in advance and publish here. This page exists so you can check our reasoning against our conclusions - and tell us when they do not match.
Methodology version 1.0, published August 2026. Changes to weights or criteria are logged at the bottom of this page.
The seven categories
Weights are set before any operator is reviewed and applied identically to all of them. They are not adjusted per operator, per market or per commercial relationship.
| Category | Weight | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| Withdrawals | 25% | Pending window length, reversal policy, processing time by method, verification timing, withdrawal caps, fees |
| Bonus fairness | 20% | Wagering base, wagering multiple, game weighting, max bet rule, max cashout, expiry window |
| Licensing and safety | 18% | Regulator, licence currency, entity match, player fund segregation, named dispute body |
| Support | 12% | Off-peak availability, answer quality on a hard question, escalation path, written record |
| Game library | 10% | Provider mix, RTP publication, live table coverage, demo play availability |
| Responsible gambling | 10% | Deposit, loss and session limits, speed a limit takes effect, self-exclusion integrity, reality checks |
| Site and app | 5% | Load speed, mobile usability, clicks to reach terms and limits, clarity of the offer page |
What a review actually involves
- Register and verify. We create a normal account and complete verification at the earliest point the operator allows, then note whether it was offered up front or only demanded later.
- Read the terms in full. All of them - general terms, bonus terms, withdrawal policy and privacy policy. Every scored bonus criterion comes from the terms document, not the marketing page.
- Deposit real money. Our own, on more than one payment method where available.
- Play normally. No unusual patterns, no attempt to trigger a security review artificially.
- Request a withdrawal and time it. Timestamped at request, at approval and at cleared funds. Repeated on a second method where the operator supports one.
- Test support at an awkward hour. A genuinely hard question with a real answer available, asked outside business hours in the operator main market.
- Test the limits. Set a deposit limit and check how quickly it binds. Check whether a self-exclusion can be undone with a phone call.
- Score, then write. Scores are recorded against the rubric before the review copy is written, so the prose has to follow the evidence rather than the other way round.
We do not score on library size, sign-up bonus headline value, design, or how good an operator affiliate programme is. We do not take an operator word for a payout time. We do not publish a review of a site we have not deposited on.
Automatic disqualifications
Any one of these ends a review and keeps the operator off our lists entirely, regardless of the score elsewhere.
- A licence number that does not resolve on the regulator register, or resolves to a different legal entity than the one taking deposits
- Terms allowing confiscation of winnings for undefined "irregular play"
- Verification demanded only after a win, when the same documents could have been requested at signup
- Deposit limits or self-exclusion that do not function, or that can be reversed instantly on request
- A sustained pattern of unanswered withdrawal complaints
- Marketing that presents gambling as income, investment, or a way out of debt
How scores translate
| Score | Verdict | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| 9.0 - 10 | Recommended | Strong across every category, with fast measured payouts and bonus terms that survive a close reading. |
| 8.0 - 8.9 | Solid | Good operator with one or two specific weaknesses, named in the review so you can judge whether they affect you. |
| 7.0 - 7.9 | Situational | Works well for a particular kind of player and poorly for others. Read the detail before depositing. |
| 6.0 - 6.9 | Caution | Real problems found. Listed only where the alternative in that market is worse. |
| Below 6.0 | Not listed | We publish the review but do not include the operator in any ranking or comparison table. |
Re-reviews and corrections
Every listed operator is re-reviewed at least quarterly. We re-review immediately when a licence status changes, when bonus terms change materially, or when complaints about payouts cluster.
If you believe something on this site is wrong - a term we have misread, a payout time that does not match your experience, a licence detail out of date - tell us through the contact page. Corrections are made to the page and noted with the date. We would rather be corrected than be quietly wrong.
Independence
WagerVerdict earns commission when a reader opens an account through one of our links. That funds the deposits, the testing time and the site. It does not buy a score, a position, a favourable line, or removal of a criticism. No operator sees a review before publication and no operator has editorial input. The full arrangement is set out on our affiliate disclosure page.
Gambling can be addictive. Only bet money you can afford to lose, set deposit and time limits before you start, and never chase losses. Free confidential help is available from BeGambleAware and GamCare. More on our responsible gambling page.