Skip to content
Graded Copy

Written and checked by Marek SowińskiRules editor

The method, in full

What was read, when, and what an empty cell means

Eleven operators sit in the table on this site. Every figure beside them was copied from a document one of them published, and it carries the clause number and the date it was read. Two of those numbers came from a licence register instead, and the table says so, because a register entry and a contract clause are not the same evidence.

What each operator publishes about itself: the company named on the licence, the permit number and where it was read, when identity documents are demanded, and how many game studios supply its lobby. A licence number read in a register is not the same evidence as one printed in the operator's own terms, and the table says which it is. An empty cell means the document was not read — it is not a zero, and it is not a permission.
CasinoOperatorLicenceBefore ID checkStudiosVisit
Vavepaid placementTechOptions Group B.V.Curaçao no numbercase by case40Visit
ThunderpickNapier LtdCuraçao Gaming Authoritycase by casenot published
Sportsbet.ionot publishedCuraçao Gaming Authority2,500 EURnot published
CloudbetHalcyon Super Holdings B.V.Curaçao Gaming Authoritycase by casenot published
Rollbitnot publishednot publishednot publishednot published
Roobetnot publishednot publishednot publishednot published
DuelbitsLiquid Entertainment N.V.Curaçao Gaming Authoritynot publishednot published
ShuffleNatural Nine B.V.Curaçao Gaming Authoritycase by casenot published
BetFuryUniverse B Games B.V.Curaçao Gaming Authoritynot publishednot published
TrustDicenot publishedCuraçao Gaming Authoritynot publishednot published
Rollettonot publishedCuraçao Gaming Authoritynot publishednot published

Eleven operators, and one kind of source

The table on this site holds 11 rows. For every one of them the same question was asked in the same order: what does this operator publish about itself, and where can a reader open it.

Four kinds of document count here. The terms of service. The betting rules, where the operator keeps its settlement clauses. The responsible-gaming and privacy pages, where account handling is described. And the entry in a licence register, where one exists and can be opened.

Four kinds, and the list ends there. A comparison site, a forum thread, a press release repeated by twenty outlets and an operator’s own marketing copy all sit outside it — the last of these whenever it contradicts the operator’s own contract.

Every figure carries its clause

A number on this site travels with two things attached: the clause it was copied from, and the date the document was read. So the withdrawal ceiling on the subject of this site reads as 100,000 € per week, clause 6.12, read on 2 September 2026 — and all three parts stay together wherever the figure goes.

The date matters more than it looks. Operators change their terms without notice, free of any obligation to tell anyone, and a clause number printed alone would claim that we read the edition in force today. What governs is the document at the operator rather than the copy of it summarised here.

This site was lucky with its subject. Thunderpick served its documents live on 2 September 2026, all 75,770 characters of the terms and all 32,099 of the betting rules, so every clause quoted here is the edition in force on that day. That is a better position than the sister site of this one is in, where the operator’s live terms could not be opened at all and a 2022 archived copy had to stand in.

A register and a contract are different evidence

The licence column on this site has a source label, and the label is doing real work.

A licence register is maintained by a regulator. It says that a permit exists, against a company name, with a status and a date. An operator’s terms are written by the operator. They say what the operator undertakes to do.

Thunderpick shows why the two must stay apart. A Curaçao register entry prints the number OGL/2024/677/0722 against the holder Napier Ltd, with the status Active. The operator’s own terms, read end to end, name no authority and no number at all. Both statements are true. They are simply answers to different questions, and a table that merged them would tell the reader that the operator published something it did not.

Where both sources exist and disagree, the disagreement is printed rather than resolved. Choosing between two documents published by their own authors is not this site’s job.

Four things this site refuses to do

It withholds the score out of ten. A score needs a formula, and a ranking whose formula is hidden is an opinion wearing a number. The rows are grouped by how strong the evidence behind them is, and the grouping is visible on the page.

It leaves an empty cell empty. Of the eleven operators here, one publishes an amount above which documents are demanded. The other ten leave it to their own judgement, and the cell stays empty rather than borrowing a figure that circulates on comparison pages. A published threshold at least tells a reader where they stand; a policy that stays unpublished can be applied at any amount and without notice, which is worse than an unfavourable published limit.

It leaves legal opinion to lawyers. A restricted-territory clause is a term in an operator’s contract, and it settles exactly one question: who that operator refuses. What the law where you live permits is a separate question with a separate source. This site answers the first and points at the second. The rest belongs to a lawyer.

It stays silent on routes around an operator’s territorial rules. Clause 3.2 of the subject’s terms closes an account and forfeits its balance for any attempt to circumvent the restriction by any means, and that sentence is printed here because it is what the contract says. Nothing beyond it is printed, in any framing.

The paid row, and where it sits

One row in the table is an advertising arrangement, and it carries the label paid placement wherever it appears.

What it gets that the others do not is placement: it sits first in the table and appears in a panel on several pages. What it does not get is a different standard of evidence. Its figures come from its own terms with clause numbers attached, exactly like every other row, and it is never placed above an operator that beats it on a figure both of them publish.

Every link to it is marked rel="sponsored nofollow noopener" and passes through a path that is disallowed in this site’s robots.txt and absent from its sitemap. No other operator on this site is linked to at all — their addresses are printed as plain text, because a link is an invitation and these are facts about companies.

When this stops being true

Terms are edited. Registers are updated. Studios are added to lobbies and removed from them.

Every date on this site is the date a document was read, and the further that date recedes the more it is worth opening the operator’s own page before depositing. Where a figure here disagrees with what the operator prints today, the operator is right and this page is stale.

Questions people actually type

Does this site test operators with real money?
No. Nobody here holds an account, places a bet or makes a withdrawal. The phrases we tested, we withdrew and our team played appear nowhere on this site, because they would describe an experience somebody had, and this site describes a document somebody read. Those are different kinds of claim and only one of them is supported here.
What does an empty cell in the table mean?
That the document answering the question was not read. It never means zero, and it never means permitted. Where a figure could be filled in from a comparison site, it is left empty instead: a borrowed number would make the page look finished and would tell a reader less than the gap does.
Why does the table separate a licence register from an operator's own terms?
Because they are different documents with different authors. Thunderpick is the clearest case on this site: a Curaçao register entry prints the number OGL/2024/677/0722 against the holder Napier Ltd, while the operator's own terms, read in full on 2 September 2026, name neither an authority nor a number. Both readings are true and they say different things, so the table prints which source each figure came from.
Is any operator here paid for its position?
One. The row marked paid placement is an advertising arrangement and sits first because it is paid, not because it scored. It is described using the same clauses and the same rules as every other row, it is never placed above an operator that beats it on a figure both of them publish, and every link to it is marked as sponsored.