Review methodology

Evidence hierarchy

Start at the closest source

For a game, the developer’s current product page and in-game information panel are preferred. For legal context, use the regulator. For a promotion, use current written terms. For a payment method, use the published cashier terms or the method’s official documentation. Competitor articles and historical tables can identify a lead, but they do not prove a current offer, withdrawal rule, account status or commercial relationship.

Editorial rating model · version 2.0

We compare three aspects of a casino: independent expert assessment, the standard monthly withdrawal allowance and the quality of live chat. The result is a source-based editorial rating out of 10, rounded once to one decimal. It is not a user vote, a Mercury deposit test or confirmation of Australian eligibility.

Why these weights?

Expert assessment dominates because reputation and treatment of players matter more than product convenience. The cashout allowance distinguishes how restrictive a published ceiling is; support has a smaller influence. The bands and weights are our editorial choices, not statistically calibrated predictions. A larger cap does not prove faster or more reliable payment. The expert index can already reflect withdrawal and support issues, so these inputs overlap; they are not three independent tests. The additional weights deliberately give those practical details more influence.

Calculation and unknowns

For complete evidence: rating = (expert × 70 + allowance × 20 + chat × 10) ÷ 100. For example, expert 8.4, a EUR 15,000 ceiling (7 points) and Good chat (8 points) give (8.4 × 70 + 7 × 20 + 8 × 10) ÷ 100 = 8.08, displayed as 8.1. Scores are not assigned to match list positions.

An unknown, conflicting or unusable input remains unscored. A rating requires an expert input and at least 80% of the total evidence weight. If 80–99% is available, we divide by the available weight and mark the result Provisional next to the number; this is an estimate from incomplete evidence and can move when the gap is resolved. Below that threshold the profile is not rated. Missing data is neither a zero nor an assumed average. If the expert index is below 5, the calculated result is capped at that index before final rounding: convenient features cannot cancel a weak assessment.

Evidence scope and updates

Each breakdown links to its sources, their recorded inputs and the verification date. The current comparison uses Casino Guru’s cross-market review data, not an AU account tier. EUR is retained for consistent allowance bands; no currency conversion or assumption about an Australian account is made. First-party rules take priority only when their offer, region and tier match. An unresolved conflict is excluded, as on ZotaBet. We have not personally deposited, withdrawn money or tested support.

Evidence expires 90 days after the recorded check; the numeric rating then disappears pending review. The source’s own review month is shown separately from our verification date. A known closure, broken destination or material new complaint should trigger earlier review. Joo Casino was removed on 11 September 2026 because we could not verify a usable destination; that is not a claim that the operator has closed.

What does not buy points

Advertised bonus size, affiliate payments, game counts, the number of fields we have filled and a working logo do not raise the rating. Bonus wagering, basis, expiry and cashout clauses are explained separately; mismatched regional promotions are not forced into a single score. The list sorts by the displayed one-decimal rating, with equal scores retaining editorial order and unrated profiles last. All current profiles remain visible.

Corrections and scope

Make a correction traceable

Changing facts should carry a check date and source URL. If a source changes or contradicts a page, revise the claim, remove unsupported wording, and state the new evidence where appropriate. Send correction material to [email protected]; the publication applies the evidence standard stated here.