Compare on what matters: licence, KYC level, payout speed, bonus value, provably fair status and our measured on-chain score.
Comparison tables usually rank on bonus size because bonus size is the easiest number to inflate. This one ranks on the things that determine what actually happens to your money: verification requirements, payout speed and limits, whether outcomes can be independently verified, the RTP builds an operator serves, and what our own on-chain index says about its deposit and withdrawal flow.
Can I get my money out, and how fast? Payout speed tiers plus the presence of a withdrawal cap answer more than any review paragraph. Will I have to verify my identity, and at what threshold? A no-KYC default is not the same as a no-KYC guarantee.
Can I check the game maths myself? A complete provably fair implementation lets you recompute results; an RNG certificate asks you to trust one. And what RTP build am I actually being served? The same slot can differ by two percentage points between operators, which costs more over a month than most bonus programmes return.
Bonus value carries the heaviest single weight in our rubric, but as measured value per wagered dollar rather than headline percentage. A rakeback programme that returns a fixed share of house edge with no playthrough beats a large deposit match with a 40x requirement in almost every realistic scenario.
Payout behaviour. Everything else is negotiable if the money leaves reliably, and nothing else matters if it does not.
No. There are no paid placements anywhere on WagerDB, and the scoring rubric with its weights is published so any ranking can be reproduced.
Because we do not hold enough verified data across the ten rubric categories yet. Those entries are marked data-limited and excluded from rankings rather than given a placeholder number.