Fifty casinos measured against BitStarz, row by row

How to recompute the leading check

Overlap points are 30 multiplied by the matched countries, divided by 74, rounded to the nearest whole point. Three worked examples, each checkable against the operator’s own terms page:

• Oshi Casino repeats 72 of the 74, giving 30 × 72 ÷ 74 = 29.19, printed as 29.
• Mirax repeats 70, giving 28.38, printed as 28.
• Bets.io repeats 38, giving 15.40, printed as 15.

Direction matters more than the arithmetic. The question asked is how much of the BitStarz list an operator repeats, and the answer stays silent about everything else in that operator’s own clause. Oshi Casino excludes 224 countries; 72 of them are BitStarz entries and 152 are extra. A reader who takes 72 of 74 to mean the two lists agree has read the fraction backwards.

The ten closest

Mirax sits first while ranking fourth on the heaviest check, and the four smaller checks explain it: 28 for overlap, then 15 for naming the Curaçao Gaming Authority exactly as BitStarz does, 10 for a VIP scheme, 10 for leaving sports out, 10 for describing verification while publishing no amount. Forty-five points came from the light end of the formula.

Rows four to seven show the reverse. Oshi Casino and PlayAmo repeat more of the territory list than anything else measured, collect the highest overlap score available at 29, and then forfeit 15 because their permit names the Anjouan Gaming Board. Bitdreams forfeits the same 15 for a subtler reason: it names Antillephone N.V., the older Curaçao master-permit holder, which is a different string from the one BitStarz prints even though the island is the same. That is a real property of the measure, and it is disclosed rather than smoothed over.

What 72 of 74 buys, and what it withholds

Four of the operators near the top of the overlap column publish territory clauses three times longer than the BitStarz one, so the overlap says their lists swallow the BitStarz list rather than match it.

• Oshi Casino: 224 entries of its own, 72 inside the BitStarz 74. The pair left out are Guadeloupe and Russia.
• PlayAmo: 217 entries, 72 inside. The pair left out are Russia and Slovakia.
• Bitkingz: 218 entries, 71 inside. Brazil, Poland and Russia are absent from it.
• Slotum: 216 entries, 69 inside, with five BitStarz entries absent.

The pair sharing first place on that column get a page each, one for the highest count and its two exceptions and one for the same count with a different pair missing.

Two rows run the other way and are more informative for it. Metaspins publishes 58 entries, of which 57 sit inside the BitStarz list; the single outsider is Malta. Its clause is close to a subset of the BitStarz one, yet the score reads 57 of 74 and pays 23 points, below Oshi Casino, because the denominator is fixed at 74 for everybody. Bets.io publishes 42 entries with 38 inside, and CryptoLeo publishes a clause of exactly 74 entries that agrees with the BitStarz 74 on 48 of them. Two lists of identical length, agreeing on roughly two thirds.

One permit number, several brands

The check worth 15 points asks whether the company on the permit is the company on the BitStarz permit, and the answer across 50 rows is a flat zero. What the reading did turn up is clustering among the operators themselves, which is a different fact and a useful one.

Five rows name Novatrix SRL: Oshi Casino, PlayAmo, Slotum and Bitkingz, plus Winz.io further down at 41 points. Four of the five print the identical Anjouan permit number, ALSI-202508056-FI2, read on 26 August 2026. Their territory clauses behave accordingly, running to 216, 217, 218 and 224 entries with 69 to 72 of the BitStarz 74 inside each.

A second cluster is stranger and stays open. Mirax prints Curaçao Gaming Authority number OGL/2024/1307/0748 and names Scores55 Tech B.V.; 7Bit Casino prints the same permit number and names a company we were unable to read. Two brands, one number, and one blank where the counterparty should be. The pairing is recorded as read on 26 August 2026 and left unresolved, because a number appearing twice supports several explanations and our reading picks between none of them. The blank fields behind that row are counted on a strong count beside an unread record.

For a player the practical consequence of a shared back office lands on the account rather than on the shopfront, and it is the reason the company field carries the same weight as the authority field despite paying out nothing at all in this dataset.

Twelve operators were read clause by clause for that table, and the fields fill unevenly on purpose: 11 of the 12 print a permit number, 11 publish a territory list, and 7 attach a withdrawal ceiling to a numbered clause. Oshi Casino caps a day at 4,000 EUR in clause 12, PlayAmo a week at 7,500 EUR in the same clause, Slotum a week at 15,000 in clause 13, Mirax a week at 10,000 EUR in clause 8, Bitdreams a month at 20,000 EUR in section 11, CryptoLeo a month at 50,000 USDT in clause 7.9, and Bets.io a single transaction at 10,000 USD in clause 10. Those seven ceilings, their windows and the five rows without one are set out on the published payout ceilings.

Twenty-one rows carry nothing to compare

Twenty-one of the 50 operators had the territory clause stay shut on 26 August 2026. Those rows carry an empty cell on the heaviest check, and 15 of them settle on the same total of 25 points, which is what the four light checks pay when almost everything else is silent.

That tie is the shape of our reading rather than a finding about those 15 businesses. An unread clause is capable of being anything, including an exact copy of the BitStarz list, and ranking it low would convert our own gap into a verdict. So the cell says unread, the row keeps its place, and the reader is told which of the two situations produced the number.

One of those rows makes the point better than any argument. MyStake finishes on 25 points with three of its seven cells empty, and MyStake is also one of the five brands recommended by the news post that ranks for this phrase. Two pages, one brand, and opposite impressions: theirs reads as an endorsement, ours reads as a hole in what we managed to open. Neither of the two is a measurement of MyStake, and only one of the two says so.

Across the whole page the arithmetic of that gap comes to 54 empty cells out of 350, leaving exactly half the rows scored on every one of the seven. The check that almost always resolved is the licensing authority: 49 of 50 rows name one, and 34 name the Curaçao Gaming Authority exactly as BitStarz does. The one that almost never resolves in an operator’s favour is the company on the permit, empty on 16 rows and matching on zero.

The fifty, in order

Each row prints the seven cells it was scored on, so any total here can be added up by hand. A shorter cut of the same ranking, ten rows deep, sits on the ten-row version of this table. Where a cell reads unread, the check met a document that stayed shut rather than an answer in the operator’s favour.

Row 13 is a compact worked example. Instant Casino repeats 33 of the 74, so the heaviest check pays 30 × 33 ÷ 74 = 13.38, printed as 13. It names the Curaçao Gaming Authority, which pays 15. Its company, Igloo Ventures SRL, differs from Gareton B.V. and pays zero, as does the absence of original games and of a published VIP tier. Sports betting is left out, worth 10, and verification is described with the amount withheld, worth another 10. The seven cells sum to 48, and the table prints 48.

Where the paid row sits

Visit

Vave pays for its placement on this site, its row in the table above carries the tag that says so, and it was read on the rules that governed the other 49. Those rules were unkind to it. Vave prints Curaçao as its jurisdiction and zero permit numbers, so a reader has nothing to look up; its territory clause was left unread on the reading date, which leaves the strongest of its seven cells blank; and it lands 27th of the 50 on a total of 35.

Its own documents did open on the payout side, read on 25 August 2026: clause 8.1 gives three working days to process a withdrawal, clause 8.7 reserves an identity check at the operator’s discretion before any payout with 14 days to supply documents, and clause 8.8 pays anything above 50,000 USDT in instalments.

One contradiction inside our own files belongs on this page rather than in a private note. The company named on the Vave pages was recorded as TechOptions Group B.V. on 25 August 2026, and the operator record re-read on 2 September 2026 names Latcas B.V. Both readings stand here with their dates, the pair is filed as unresolved, and picking the tidier one would be an editorial act wearing the costume of a fact.

What this measure declines to settle

A territory clause is a term in a contract, and it settles exactly one question: which players that operator turns away. What the law where a reader lives permits is a separate question with a separate source, and this site answers the first and points at the second.

Good standing sits outside the seven checks as well. Third place belongs to a brand whose own permit entry came back marked Revoked on the day it was looked up, and third place is where the arithmetic left it, because these totals rank resemblance and were built for that alone. The register reading travels beside the score instead of inside it, with the number and the date set out on the seven checks in full.

The last omission is the largest. Nobody here holds an account with any operator named on this page, has deposited at one or has been paid by one, so a sentence about how the withdrawals felt is absent by design. What stands in its place is a clause number, a date, and a formula printed where a reader can check it, set out at length on how similarity is counted and on who writes this.