See which documents and product features inform a review, how we compare two platforms and how commercial relationships are disclosed.
Start with the evidence behind the feature you care about. A published redemption minimum tells you the balance required to request a prize. It cannot tell you how quickly a particular reader received one. Our reviews identify whether a claim comes from a rule, an observed product feature or a documented transaction.
| Question | Evidence we look for |
|---|---|
| What can a player purchase and use? | The dated terms, offer details and rules for the named game or promotion. |
| Can a player request a prize? | Qualifying unit, prize-specific minimum, verification and delivery conditions. |
| Where is the activity available? | Official state sources and operator terms for that activity. Unconfirmed availability is identified. |
| How well does a feature work? | A dated observation, with device, account conditions and the steps tested. |
| How were alternatives compared? | The same criterion, period and conditions applied to each eligible platform. |
How to read an assessment
Our documentary reviews describe what the sources establish. We identify untested features, date measurements and distinguish processing estimates from observed delivery times. A numeric score requires published criteria, weights and evidence for each scored item. The Card Crush and McLuck reviews use descriptive assessments; neither reports a measured payout speed or an overall score.
Each commercial review must identify any client or referral relationship next to the relevant recommendation or link. A missing relationship declaration needs resolution before publication. Readers can check the rules supporting a comparison even when a platform has no referral arrangement. Read the Card Crush assessment
For a creator publishing a sponsored demonstration, see examples of clear sponsorship disclosures.
Something changed? Send a correction.