GambleOrbit
How we compare
We rank listings by how well each operator matches the page you are on and the country you are in, and we publish the factors that produce that order. We do not score operators out of ten and we do not name an overall winner. This page explains the difference.
How the recommended order is computed
Listings are ordered by a recommended rank. It is a per-request match for one page, one country and one intent — never a quality verdict, and never stored on an operator. The same operator can be first on one country hub and absent from another, because the question the rank answers is “how well does this operator fit what this page is about, for this reader”, not “how good is this operator”.
Eligibility is decided before any ranking happens. An operator whose own terms do not accept your country is not ranked low: it is not eligible and it does not appear. That is the direct answer to the objection that retired our old score — one set of weights, applied to every reader, put the operators that actually served their market near the bottom. Here the market is an input, not a penalty.
| Factor | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Fit to the page's intent | 0.28 | Studio support, payment method, deposit band or bonus type — whatever the page is actually about. |
| Safety Index | 0.24 | The factor-decomposed trust score we already publish on every review. An input to the order, not a synonym for it. |
| Offer transparency | 0.18 | A missing wagering figure costs the row rank. It is never hidden to make the offer look better. |
| Regulated-market suitability | 0.14 | The licence the operator holds, read against the market you are in. |
| Freshness | 0.10 | How recently we checked the offer. A stale offer is withheld entirely rather than merely demoted. |
| Commercial value | 0.06 | The value of the commercial deal, not the fact of one. Bounded and capped, and sponsored placement is separated out entirely instead of being priced in here. |
The commercial factor is real and it is disclosed. It measures deal value, not deal purchase; it is bounded, it is capped, and it is the smallest factor in the table, so it cannot reorder the top of a list on its own.
Paid placement is never interleaved with editorial order. A sponsored row is lifted out of the ranked list into its own labelled block and carries no rank number at all — omitting the numeral is the only version of that rule a careless front end cannot undo.
Methodology version in force: 2026-08-12.1
How the order on our listings is decided
Order is the recommended match for the page and the country you are on, not a payment and not an alphabet. We earn a commission when a reader registers through one of our links (see our Affiliate Disclosure), and the value of that deal is one bounded, capped factor among six — small enough that it cannot move the top of a list on its own, and disclosed rather than denied.
Sponsored placement, where it exists, is a separate labelled block with no rank number. Nothing about the facts shown for any operator changes because of either.
What we publish about every operator
| What | What it covers | How to check it yourself |
|---|---|---|
| Licence and regulator | Every authority the operator is licensed by, with the licence number where one is published. Where an entry shows an authority and no number, we could not verify one — and it says so rather than leaving the space blank. | We read the issuing regulator’s register ourselves and publish what it says — including a lapsed term or an open assessment. |
| Responsible-gambling tools | Which of seven tools the operator actually exposes: deposit limits, reality checks, self-exclusion, timeout, self-assessment, transaction history and a visible help link. A tool is recorded as absent unless we find it, never assumed present. | Open the operator’s responsible-gambling page and count them yourself. |
| Bonus terms | The wagering requirement on the welcome offer, the minimum deposit, any cap on what a bonus can pay out, and which game types contribute nothing toward clearing it. The headline figure is rarely the number that decides what an offer is worth. | The operator’s own bonus terms and conditions. |
| Banking and reach | Published deposit and withdrawal methods, currencies, languages, and the countries the operator states it accepts. | The operator’s banking or cashier page. |
| Track record | Founding year and operating history, plus any licence change we can evidence. | Company records. |
Every one of these can be verified without opening an account. Where we do not hold a fact, the entry says so instead of estimating it — a missing licence number is shown as missing, not rounded up into a claim.
What we deliberately do not do
We do not open accounts, deposit or play (see our Editorial Policy), so we make no claim about withdrawal speed in practice, support responsiveness, or how games behave in play. Those need an account and money on the table, and a claim we cannot evidence is worth less than no claim at all.
We do not name an overall winner. A rank names the best match for one page and one country, and the page says so in those words; it is not a claim that an operator is better than another in general. Our comparison pages still show which operator has the lower wagering requirement or the broader banking list, because those are facts, and they still do not add them up into a verdict.
What this costs, and why we accept it
A number is easier to scan than a table, and review pages carrying ratings are eligible for star snippets in search results — which we have given up. We think the trade is right. A rating we could not defend line by line would be the most consequential unbacked claim on a site where people are deciding where to put their money.
When entries change
An entry changes when its facts change: a licence gained, lost, or verified against the register; responsible-gambling tools added or removed; bonus terms revised. Each review carries the date we last checked it.