How we rate operators
How this site rates crypto casinos: primary sources only, unread fields recorded as unread, revoked licences flagged, and a plain list of what we never do.
Written by the editorial desk/Last checked:
Reads operator documents and records what they say
This page describes the method behind every operator record on this site, including the parts of it that produce blank cells. It is written so a reader can tell the difference between a thing we checked and a thing we did not.
The short version: facts come from an operator's own documents or from a public licence register, an unread field is recorded as unread, brands whose register entry returns a revoked status are flagged, and the score counts only fields we have actually read. It is the same rule for every BC Game alternative; what it cannot tell a reader about their own legal position is kept on a separate page.
Where a fact is allowed to come from
There are two permitted sources for an operator fact here. The first is a document the operator publishes itself: its terms, its AML or compliance page, its licences page, its provably fair page, its game listing. The second is a public register run by a licensing authority, looked up by number or domain.
There is no third source. We do not take a licence number from another review site, a coin list from an affiliate feed, or a bonus figure from a promotional email. If a fact cannot be traced to the operator's own page or to a register, it does not go into the library and the field stays empty. Each record carries the date it was checked, because a register result is a result on a day.
What an empty field means
In our data an empty array and a null say the same thing: we have not read the document that would answer this. Neither ever means the answer is none, zero or no.
The alternative is worse than it sounds. Treat an unread cashier page as a brand that accepts no coins, or an unread terms page as a brand with no withdrawal cap, and the operator that published nothing scores better than the one that published a limit honestly. Making unread a value in its own right is the fix.
Every page here renders those fields with words rather than dashes. Not verified, not read, not recorded and not published all mean the same thing, and none is a judgement about the operator.
How the score is computed
A score is the average of the checks we could run, and the denominator is the number of fields read, not the number that exist. A brand with three read fields is scored over three, not over fifteen with twelve implicit zeroes.
That choice has one failure mode, worth stating openly: a brand that publishes almost nothing has a very small denominator and can look artificially confident. We answer it by publishing the coverage next to the score and by never ranking on score alone where the licence field is unread.
Fields carry different weights. A licence entry that resolves in a register outweighs a tag, because it is checkable by the reader and revocable by someone other than the operator. A tag taken from an operator's own marketing is the weakest evidence we accept, and it is labelled as one wherever it appears.
| Field | Operators with it read | Out of |
|---|---|---|
| Licence number recorded | 40 | 44 |
| Verification summary read from the terms | 36 | 44 |
| Game providers list read | 24 | 44 |
| Coin list read | 22 | 44 |
| Withdrawal cap read with amount, currency and period | 8 | 44 |
| Numeric verification threshold read from the terms | 5 | 44 |
Counted from the operator library that builds this site. The gaps are the point: they are printed rather than filled, and they are the reason several tables on this site are half empty.
Revoked and superseded licences
A register can return a status other than active, and we record the status rather than the fact of an entry existing. Where it returns revoked, the brand is flagged, and the flag survives a newer licence elsewhere.
The subject of this site is the example. The Curaçao Gaming Authority register carries BC.Game entry OGL/2023/118/0060 with the status Revoked, checked on 26 August 2026, while BC.Game also holds a current Anjouan licence, ALSI-202410011-FI1, returned as VALID on 27 August 2026. Both are recorded, because a reader arriving from a listing that still says Curaçao needs both to understand what they are looking at.
Flagging a revoked entry is not the same as calling a brand unlicensed. It is a note that one number in one register no longer stands, on the date we looked.
Licence conditions are licence facts
A register entry can carry conditions alongside its status, and where it does we quote the condition as the authority frames it rather than paraphrasing. The Anjouan record for BC.Game returns a status and also states territories the licence does not extend to; our licence check page carries that record in full, because it belongs with the register evidence rather than scattered across comparison pages.
A condition published by a licensor is a different kind of document from an operator's own terms, and our tables keep the two apart. Neither is a statement about any reader's position, which is dealt with only on our legal notice page.
What we have not done
We have not deposited at any operator listed on this site, not played at them, not withdrawn from them and not tested their support queues. No page here says otherwise, and none describes a session that did not happen.
We do not publish claimed payout speeds as if they were measured. An operator advertising instant withdrawals has made a marketing claim, and reprinting it with our name attached would convert it into a finding. Where withdrawal speed appears here, it is labelled as a claim.
We do not employ a named reviewer persona. The pages are written and maintained by the site's editorial desk, and where a page would name a checker it names the date and the document instead.
- No deposits, no play, no withdrawals, no support tests
- No payout times presented as measured
- No invented reviewer, tester or team member
- No facts taken from other review sites, aggregators or affiliate feeds
- No estimated numbers where a document was not read
Corrections
Operator documents change, registers are updated, and a record checked in August can be wrong by October. Every page carries the date its facts were last checked, and a factual correction is published with a dated note rather than edited away silently. The fastest way to have an error fixed is to name the page, the row and the document that contradicts it; our contact page explains what happens next.
Questions people ask
- Do you take facts from other casino review sites?
No. Every operator fact traces to the operator's own published document or to a public licence register. If neither source answers a question, the field stays empty and the page says so.
- What does not verified mean in your tables?
It means we have not read the document that would answer the field. It never means the answer is none or zero, and it is not a judgement about the operator.
- Have you played at the casinos you compare?
No. We have not deposited, played or withdrawn at any operator listed here, and no page on this site claims otherwise.
- Why do some brands have almost nothing recorded?
Because we have not read their documents yet, or because they do not publish them. The score counts only fields we have read, and we publish the coverage next to the score so a thin record is visible rather than hidden.
- How often is a record rechecked?
Register statuses and licence numbers are the highest priority to recheck, because they change without notice. Every record and every page carries the date it was last checked so a reader can judge how fresh it is.
BC Game alternatives — How this site rates crypto casinos: primary sources only, unread fields recorded as unread, revoked licences flagged, and a plain list of what we never do.