Editorial Policy

Bonus Type & Size

We measure how generous the welcome package is, including deposit matches, free spins, and no-deposit bonuses

• Excellent: Bonus value exceeds your deposit, or a generous no-deposit offer with meaningful no-wagering free spins.
• Good: Bonus value roughly matches your deposit (e.g., 100% match) or a modest no-deposit/free spins offer with real value.
• Average: Bonus value is less than your deposit, or free spins tied to a deposit add only limited value.
• Weak: Bonus is worth about half (or less) of your deposit, or free spins have very low value.
• Poor: Bonus value is negligible (less than £1), or free spins/no-deposit offers worth only pennies.

Wagering Requirements

We check how fair the wagering requirements are. A wagering requirement is how many times you must bet the bonus before withdrawing winnings, the lower is better.

• Excellent: 20× or less
• Good: 25–35×
• Average: 40–50×
• Weak: 60–70×
• Poor: Over 70×

Game Restrictions

We look at which games count toward clearing bonuses and how inclusive the rules are

• Excellent: Slots count fully, table games contribute meaningfully (≥10%), with only niche exclusions.
• Good: Slots count fully, some table/live games contribute, and only a few popular titles are excluded.
• Average: Slots-only bonuses or no-wagering free spins tied to a single slot; still usable but with limited variety.
• Weak: Narrow eligible list with many top or popular games excluded, restricting real choice.
• Poor: Very limited selection where most popular games are excluded, leaving little practical value.

Bonus Validity

We measure how long you have to use the bonus before it expires. Longer timeframes are more player-friendly.

• Excellent: 30+ days
• Good: 7–14 days
• Average: 3–7 days
• Weak: 48 hours
• Poor: 24 hours

Ongoing Promos

We check what’s offered beyond the welcome bonus. How frequent, fair, and transparent the promotions are.

• Excellent: Weekly offers with fair wagering (≤25×), regular tournaments/boosts/free spins/credits, clear terms.
• Good: Consistent monthly cadence; mostly fair terms.
• Average: Occasional promos; mixed fairness or unclear.
• Weak: Rare or gimmicky, weak clarity.
• Poor: Only the welcome bonus, nothing ongoing.

Loyalty Program

We evaluate the loyalty scheme. How easy it is to earn rewards, what the perks are, and whether rewards have real value

• Excellent: Clear earn/redeem, cashback or cash-equivalent perks, accessible tiers, no extra wagering on rewards.
• Good: Mostly clear; decent cashback/benefits; mild gating.
• Average: Exists but unclear or heavily point-based; real value only at higher tiers.
• Weak: Opaque or cosmetic perks, slow earn.
• Poor: Invitation-only or negligible value.

We measure how strong and reliable the casino’s licence is. Strong regulators mean better player protection, fairer play, and safer payments, while weaker offshore licences offer less oversight.

• Excellent: Strong baseline under national regulator; clean sanction history, transparent site, reliable payouts, robust RG tools.
• Good/Average: Licensed but some issues with clarity or conduct.
• Weak/Poor: Sanctions, payout delays, or minimal RG presentation.

Library Diversity

We measure how broad and up-to-date the overall game library is. A strong offering covers all major categories and adds new releases quickly.

• Excellent: Very broad library across all game types; new releases arrive quickly.
• Good: Strong overall library with only a minor gap.
• Average: Solid but missing at least one major category or lacks depth.
• Weak: Noticeably limited, few categories represented.
• Poor: Minimal selection.

Progressive & Special Modes

We look at the availability of jackpot games and innovative play modes. More progressives and unique features signal stronger variety and appeal.

• Excellent: Multiple major progressives plus modern special modes.
• Good: Some progressives with several special modes.
• Average: Few progressives or only basic modes.
• Weak: Rare progressives, little innovation.
• Poor: No progressives or special modes at all.

Top-Tier Providers

We evaluate the quality of game studios represented in the catalogue. Having well-known providers alongside mid-size and indie studios ensures trust and variety.

• Excellent: Many leading studios plus a mix of mid-size/indie providers.
• Good: Most top studios present.
• Average: Mixed catalog with notable gaps in big-name providers.
• Weak: Only a few recognised providers.
• Poor: Mostly unknown or in-house only.

Live Casino Diversity

We assess the depth of live dealer content. A strong live casino includes table staples, game shows, and flexible stake levels.

• Excellent: Full spread of table games, game shows, and multiple stake levels.
• Good: Broad core set with some variants.
• Average: Core games only with limited variants and limits.
• Weak: Very small live casino offering.
• Poor: No live casino.

Game Info & Transparency

We check how clearly game information is displayed, including RTP (return-to-player) stats and rules. Easy access to accurate info improves fairness and trust.

• Excellent: RTP and key stats shown directly in-lobby, plus clear rules.
• Good: Full info available with one click.
• Average: Partial or inconsistent information.
• Weak: Sparse info; often requires external search.
• Poor: No meaningful info provided.

Deposits & Withdrawals Coverage

We check how many payment methods are supported for deposits and withdrawals, and how reliable they are.

• Excellent: Wide range of local and global methods, fast e-wallets/instant bank, and low minimums (£5 deposit/withdrawal).
• Good: Strong coverage but with a few gaps and higher minimums (e.g., £10).
• Average: Standard set with noticeable gaps, limited withdrawal methods, and higher minimums (often £20).
• Weak: Few practical methods beyond debit cards and bank transfer.
• Poor: Only debit cards and bank transfer available.

Speed & Transparency

We evaluate how fast payouts are processed and how clearly the casino communicates timelines. Transparency reduces uncertainty and complaints.

• Excellent: Payouts within 24–48h (including weekends), clear timings per method, consistent record.
• Good: Usually 1–2 business days, mostly clear info, rare issues.
• Average: 2–4 days, occasional pending delays, fragmented info.
• Weak: 4–7 days, frequent delays, vague or hidden info.
• Poor: Over a week or repeated holds, misleading info, high complaints.

Performance & Navigation

We test how fast and stable the platform runs, and how easy it is to find games or promotions. Smooth loading, stable play, and clear navigation are key.

• Excellent: Lightning-fast loads (5s), stable play with no crashes, smooth resume. Clear categories, strong search, and filters that make games and promos easy to find.
• Good: Mostly smooth, with only minor hiccups (5–8s loads or small glitches). Good search/filters; promos within one click.
• Average: Occasional lag, spinners, or timeouts. Basic search/filters; promos scattered.
• Weak: Frequent lag/freezes, periodic crashes. Hard to find games/promos; poor categorisation.
• Poor: Regular crashes, long stalls, broken structure where users must hunt.

In-Game & Mobile Experience

We look at how well games run once launched and how polished the mobile experience is. Stable gameplay and responsive design ensure accessibility across devices.

• Excellent: Stable fullscreen play, quick panel, remembers past games, smooth portrait/landscape, consistent lobby return. Mobile layouts responsive with large touch targets, sticky nav, strong PWA/native app, biometric login, seamless resume.
• Good: Solid overall, just minor quirks or a few cramped screens.
• Average: Occasional layout issues, slow restore, or viewport jumps. Usable but cramped.
• Weak: Frequent glitches, unresponsive controls, desktop-first design needing pinch-zoom.
• Poor: Broken scaling, unreliable controls, many flows unusable on mobile.

Availability & Access

We check how easy it is to reach human support, what channels are available, and whether local language coverage exists.

• Excellent: 24/7 live chat plus email (phone optional), fast human handoff from bot, local languages covered, clear hours.
• Good: Extended live chat (16–20h) plus email, decent language coverage.
• Average: Limited-hours chat or email-only but responsive; English-only in non-English markets.
• Weak: Email/webform only, slow live chat hours, poor language fit.
• Poor: No reliable human support channel or routinely unavailable.

Speed & Transparency

We test how fast issues are resolved and how clearly the process is communicated through FAQs, help centres, or ticketing systems.

• Excellent: Chat replies within 1 minute, email within 2 hours, many cases resolved at first contact, clear ETA and ticket tracking. Help center is searchable, localised, and includes promotional info, with incident/status page.
• Good: Chat replies 1–3 minutes, email same day, simple cases resolved quickly. FAQ coverage strong and linked to promos.
• Average: Chat replies 3–5 minutes, email within 24h, multiple touches needed. Basic FAQs with scattered promo help, limited localization.
• Weak: Chat 5–10 minutes, email 24–48h, frequent escalations. Sparse or outdated articles, unclear processes.
• Poor: Chat +10 minutes or frequent timeouts, email 48–72h, unresolved loops. No meaningful help center or hidden rules.