A repeatable six-part score

How we review online casinos

Featured placement and editorial scoring are shown separately. Launch and availability-watch listings can appear first, while numeric scores are reserved for casinos with current primary-source research.

Verification gate

Before scoring, we identify the operator, licence, applicable site version, current terms and intended market. A launch-stage or inaccessible product remains unscored until enough current evidence is available.

Hands-on product review

We examine navigation, game discovery, account information, mobile layouts, cashier disclosures, support access and responsible-gambling tools. We distinguish what we observed from what the operator claims.

Payments and bonus reading

Published processing targets are recorded separately from receiving-method time. Bonus analysis names the wagering base, minimum deposit, maximum stake, contribution and expiry where available.

Scoring and verdict

Category scores are multiplied by the published weights. The verdict explains who may value the operator and which limitation should change the decision.

Ongoing review

Licences, ownership, offers, restrictions and payment rules can change. Each scored review shows its research date and the primary sources used.

Category weights

Safety and licensing25%Licence status, operator identity, terms, location controls and safer-gambling tools.
Payments and withdrawals20%Payment range, published processing policy, fees, verification and practical payout clarity.
Games and providers18%Depth, variety, provider quality, live casino coverage and game information.
Mobile experience15%Responsive play, navigation, account controls and app or browser usability.
Customer support12%Contact channels, opening hours, help-centre quality and escalation routes.
Bonus clarity and value10%Transparent eligibility, wagering, game weighting, expiry and maximum-bet rules.

Score bands

Exceptional90–100Strong evidence across nearly every category, with no material unresolved issue.
Very good80–89A competitive operator with clear strengths and manageable limitations.
Good70–79Generally sound, but with gaps, regional limitations or less competitive terms.
Mixed60–69Usable for a narrower audience; important trade-offs need careful reading.
Not recommendedBelow 60Material concerns outweigh the operator’s advantages.