Our Guidelines for Determining the Bookmakers Ranking

1.1. The reliability of the bookmaker is determined by analysing the frequency of non-payment of winnings to players. The team collects data through players' feedback and complaints on various platforms, including social media. We also investigate the reasons for non-payment and communicate with the bookmaker's representative to understand the details of disputes related to each non-payment.

1.2. The team evaluates the frequency and justification of returning successful bets, cutting maximums for specific players, blocking accounts, confiscating winnings or balances, etc. We analyse conflict situations between players and bookmakers and assemble information on the justification of the bookmaker's actions against the player. Based on this, our team determines how often or rarely the bookmaker abuses their dominant position to the user.

1.3. Every bookmaker is strictly required to possess a legitimate license issued by the government of the countries where the platform accepts users. The fact of licensing positively impacts the bookmaker's reliability and, therefore, the rating.

1.4. Frequent legal proceedings against the bookmaker initiated by legal entities and users can negatively affect their trustworthiness. Therefore, the more lawsuits a bookmaker has, the less reliable we consider them to be.

1.5. A bookmaker must have at least three years of activity to get into the rating.

1.6. Our editorial team evaluates the management of each bookmaker, including their experience in the gambling industry and other previous projects.

1.7. Our ranking team has observed a possible correlation between the audience size of a bookmaker and its perceived reliability. As a result, we analyse statistics from open sources, such as public company reports to estimate the bookmaker's audience size and engagement levels.

2.1. Bookmakers with higher odds than their competitors offer players more winnings and get more popular among bettors, so we also use this information assuming the overall rank.

2.2. The bookmaker's margin is directly proportional to odds, as it is the percentage that the bookmaker takes from each bet to generate their gross gaming revenue (GGR). Hence, a greedier bookmaker has a higher margin and lower odds than other bookmakers, which can’t impact our ranking positively.

3.1. We assess the number of lines the bookmaker offers, including various sports types, outcomes, and the presence of petite or exotic markets (rare outcomes).

3.2. When evaluating bookmakers, we consider whether they offer a betting line on the day of the match or in advance, usually 1-2 days beforehand. Bookmakers that provide betting lines earlier allow for more betting options for players, a factor we consider in our evaluation process.

3.3. As part of our bookmaker evaluation process, we assess whether the betting line offered by the bookmaker is created independently or if it is taken from other bookmakers without authorisation or legal rights. We use various methods within the bookmaking industry to detect such issues. Our editorial team is vigilant in identifying instances where a bookmaker may use another bookmaker's lines without proper authorisation.

4.1. Bookmakers with a bigger selection of bonuses, promotions, free bets, cashback, and other loyalty programs receive a higher score.

4.2. We highly appreciate bookmakers offering special bonuses for significant sports events like Christmas or Father’s Day.

4.3. We evaluate how easy it is for players to meet requirements for bonuses. If a bookmaker provides complex requirements despite having multiple bonuses and promotions, they will receive a lower score for the "Bonuses and promotions" criterion. Bookmakers should provide clear and concise information regarding their bonuses and promotions, and we consider the complexity level in meeting the requirements when evaluating their overall performance.

5.1. We have observed that the more payment methods a bookmaker offers, the more convenient it is for players. Therefore, we consider the number and variety of payment methods available when evaluating bookmakers.

5.2. Bookmakers with lower fees for depositing and withdrawing money will receive a higher score in this category, as it is more advantageous for players. Bookmakers should offer fair and transparent fees for financial transactions, and we consider this when evaluating their overall performance.

6.1. Bookmakers that offer multiple communication channels (such as website chat, phone, messengers, emails, etc.) to interact with players will receive a higher score in this category, as it is more convenient for players. We recognise that players have different preferences when it comes to communication, and we rank higher the bookmakers which provide multiple options to accommodate those preferences.

6.2. As part of our evaluation process, our editorial team considers it reasonable for bookmaker representatives to respond to user requests within one working day. However, if there is a lack of communication with the user for more than one day, it is considered neglectful to users' interests.

6.3. We assess how effectively the support service addresses client requests and their politeness, proactivity, and focus on solving the problem.

The overall score of the bookmaker is calculated using the following formula:

(Reliability score x 3 + Odds score x 1 + Line score x 0.33 + Bonuses and promotions score x 1 + Payment systems score x 0.33 + Support score x 0.33) / 6