The five criteria
Every ranking on this site comes from the same five criteria, weighted as shown. The weightings are published because a ranking you cannot audit is just an assertion.
| Criterion | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Welcome value | 25% | The published headline itself: match percentage, dollar cap, and any free-spin count, taken directly from the bonus terms. |
| Turnover cost | 25% | The wagering multiple attached to the welcome offer, and the maximum cashout or cap that limits what it can actually pay out. |
| Entry cost | 20% | The minimum deposit required to unlock the welcome offer at all — how cheap it is to test the operator. |
| US state access | 20% | How much of the country the operator will accept, taken from its own excluded-state instructions. |
| Terms published | 10% | Whether the operator states its own bonus terms plainly and in full, versus leaving the reader to guess at a wagering multiple or expiry window. |
How the testing actually works
Most of this is documentary work, and we would rather describe it plainly than dress it up. For each operator we read the terms and conditions, the bonus terms, the cashier page and the banking page, and we record the numbers with the date we read them. We take the excluded-state instructions from our own operator lineup and we print the date on the row. Where a figure is not published anywhere we can cite, we write that it is not published rather than estimating it.
What we deliberately do not score
- Withdrawal timings we did not measure. A payout-speed column is the most quoted and least verifiable thing on a page like this. If we have not timed a withdrawal at an operator, there is no number for it here.
- Which licence a named brand holds, unless it was checked against the issuing regulator's register. An unverified licence attribution is the most damaging error this kind of page can make.
- Catalogue size. Ten thousand games is a procurement fact, not a player benefit.
- Loyalty and VIP schemes, which are discretionary rather than contractual at these operators and therefore not a reason to choose one.
Ratings and the merit curve
Star ratings are set on a descending curve across the whole lineup rather than awarded in isolation, so a 4.9 means first of fifteen on these criteria and not an absolute score. Sub-scores on individual reviews are marked out of ten against the same criteria, which is why an operator can score 10 on state access and 4.5 on turnover cost in the same card.
Independence
Some links on this site are commercial and are marked as such at the foot of every page. Commercial terms do not reach the people writing, no operator has ever been moved up for paying more, and no operator sees a review before it publishes. If an operator's terms get worse, its position falls, and the criteria above are the whole reason we can say that and be checked on it.
Corrections
Bonus figures move. Excluded-state lists move. If something on this site is out of date or wrong, write to editorial@floheadworks.com with the page and the operator and we will re-check it against source and re-date the row.