How We Rate New Non GamStop Casinos
Our scores weight what can be verified over what can be experienced, because at a site that opened months ago there is no experience to draw on yet. These are the five dimensions, their weightings, and what moves a score in each direction.
Why new operators need a different scoring model
Most casino review criteria assume a track record. They score payout reliability, complaint handling and how an operator behaves in a dispute, all of which require history. Applied to a brand new site, those criteria produce a number with nothing underneath it, so the score ends up reflecting the size of the welcome offer and the quality of the web design.
We score what a young operator can actually evidence. The result is deliberately conservative: a new site cannot reach the top of our range on reputation, because it has none, and it cannot lose points for a dispute history it has not had time to accumulate.
The five criteria and their weightings
Licence trail, 30%
The single heaviest weighting, because it is the most falsifiable thing about an operator. We check that the footer names the licensee company rather than only the brand, that a licence number is given, and that the number resolves to a live entry in the issuing register. A licence badge that is an image with no link scores nothing. We also check that the name on the register entry matches the company in the footer, since a mismatch is common and rarely accidental.
Terms clarity, 25%
Whether the terms are dated, whether the wagering multiple states what it applies to, whether game weighting is published as a table, whether excluded titles are named, and whether the maximum bet during bonus play is declared. Undated terms lose points automatically, because they can change without appearing to.
Cashier disclosure, 20%
Per method deposit and withdrawal limits, a stated review window, and a published monthly withdrawal ceiling. Specificity scores; a blanket claim of instant payouts across all methods costs points rather than earning them.
Game library, 15%
Breadth of slots, whether return to player is visible per title, whether live dealer content is licensed or native, and whether the lobby reflects a curated range or a raw aggregator feed. Weighted lower than it usually is elsewhere, because almost every new site licenses the same aggregated content and library size says little about the operator.
Support response, 10%
We ask one specific question, usually the maximum withdrawal in a single transaction, before depositing. A clear number scores well. A link to the FAQ does not. We record the channel and the response time.
How we test a withdrawal
Where we test, the sequence is fixed so the results are comparable. We register, complete verification before depositing, deposit at or near the site's minimum, play through a small amount, then request a withdrawal to the same method. We record the time from request to funds arriving, not the time to the operator marking it processed, because those are different numbers and only one of them matters to a player.
One withdrawal is one data point and we label it as such. A single fast payout does not make an operator reliable, and we say so in the reviews rather than letting the figure imply more than it can carry.
What loses a site points
- A licence badge that does not resolve to a register entry
- A licensee name in the footer that differs from the register
- Undated terms, or terms that changed without a revision date
- Wagering that applies to deposit plus bonus without saying so plainly
- Game weighting described in a sentence instead of published as a table
- A monthly withdrawal cap low enough to make a decent win impractical to collect
- Support that answers a specific question with a link
What gets an operator removed
We take a site off the shortlist if its licence entry lapses or changes, if withdrawal times we can observe drift from hours to days, if a monthly cap appears in the terms that was not there before, or if we find a credible pattern of unpaid withdrawals. We also remove a brand if it turns out to share infrastructure with an operator we have already removed, since the front page is not the thing that failed.
Removals are not announced retrospectively on the page, but the shortlist is re-checked and the reasons are recorded. The new non GamStop casinos page carries an updated date so you can see how current the assessment is.
Independence
We earn commission when a reader opens an account with a listed operator. That relationship funds the site and it does not set the order. Ranking follows the weightings above, applied to what we could verify, and an operator cannot buy a position or a higher score. Where a commercial relationship exists with a brand we have declined to list, it stays unlisted. More on how the site is funded is on the about page.