How we rate
This page explains how operators and products are assessed on sdgyl.org, so that you can check any article on this site against the same criteria we used to write it.
Assessments are based on published terms, licence information and publicly available sources. In practice this means we read what an operator states about itself — its terms and conditions, bonus rules, payment and withdrawal pages, licensing statements and any public register entries that confirm them — and we compare those statements with each other. Where a claim cannot be checked against a published source, we say so in the article rather than treat it as established.
What we look at
Every assessment on this site addresses the points below. If an article is missing one of them, it is incomplete, and you are right to read it with that in mind.
- Licence and regulatory status. Which authority is named, what the operator claims about its authorisation, and whether that claim appears in a publicly accessible register or licence listing.
- Terms and conditions. Whether the full terms are available before registration, how clearly they are written, and whether they contradict claims made elsewhere on the operator’s site or in its marketing.
- Bonus and promotion rules. Wagering requirements, game weightings as the operator states them, maximum bet limits while a bonus is active, expiry rules, and any clause allowing the operator to cancel or reclaim a bonus.
- Payments and withdrawals. The methods listed, stated minimum and maximum amounts, any withdrawal caps, and whether fees and verification requirements are disclosed up front.
- Verification and account rules. What documents are requested, at what point in the customer relationship, and what the terms say about account closure, dormancy and confiscation of balances.
- Game and software providers. Which studios supply the content and whether the operator publishes information about return-to-player figures and independent testing.
- Responsible gambling tools. Which limits, self-exclusion options and reality checks are offered, and how easy they are to find and apply.
- Complaints and dispute routes. Whether a complaints procedure is published and whether an external dispute resolution body is named.
- Transparency and consistency. Whether the operator’s published information is coherent, dated and accessible without creating an account.
What we do not do
We do not test games for fairness ourselves; that is the work of accredited testing laboratories. Where testing or certification is relevant, we report what has been published about it and point to the source, rather than offering a verdict of our own.
Commercial relationships
A commercial relationship with an operator does not change its assessment. The criteria above are applied in the same way and in the same order regardless of whether such a relationship exists.
If you believe an assessment on this site rests on outdated or incorrect published information, please tell us which article and which point is affected, and we will re-check it against the source.