Vave- Operating company
- TechOptions Group B.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao no number
- Withdrawal cap
- from 50.000 USDT in instalments art. 8.8
- Documents from
- case by case
Where every figure on this site comes from
Two documents per operator, one rule for empty fields and one paid link. This page writes those three things down in such a way that somebody who disagrees with us can point out exactly what he disagrees with.
What the operators put on paper themselves: the name they trade under, the licence they cite, the cap that applies to a withdrawal and the amount above which they ask for documents. Behind every figure stands the clause it comes from. An empty field means the operator publishes nothing about it or that we could not read it — it is not a zero and not an ‘unlimited’. None of the ten appears in the licence register of the Kansspelautoriteit, the Dutch gambling regulator.
Bitcasino.io- Operating company
- Moon Technologies B.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- 1.000.000 USDT per week art. 6.10
- Documents from
- 2.500 EUR
Empire.io- Operating company
- Pixel Entertainment Limited
- Licence
- Anjouan Gaming Board licence excludes NL
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- 2.000 USDT
Bitsler- Operating company
- Oyine N.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
Cloudbet- Operating company
- Halcyon Super Holdings B.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
CoinCasino- Operating company
- Igloo Ventures SRL
- Licence
- Anjouan Gaming Board licence excludes NL
- Withdrawal cap
- 500.000 EUR per month art. 9.6
- Documents from
- not published
Rakebit- Operating company
- Nile King Media Ltd
- Licence
- Anjouan Gaming Board licence excludes NL
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
Primedice- Operating company
- Antillephone
- Licence
- Government of Curaçao
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
Stake- Operating company
- Medium Rare N.V.
- Licence
- Curaçao Gaming Authority
- Withdrawal cap
- not published
- Documents from
- not published
BetPlays- Operating company
- not published
- Licence
- not published
- Withdrawal cap
- 5.000 EUR per week art. 6.11
- Documents from
- not published
Two documents per operator
For every operator in the overview, two things have been looked up.
The first is the licence register of the Kansspelautoriteit, the Dutch gambling regulator. The operator has been searched for in it. For all ten the outcome is that the operator does not appear in it; that is the basis of everything else on this site, and it is the only outcome on this entire site that anyone can verify for themselves in ten seconds.
The second is the operator's own general terms and conditions. From those come the company name, the jurisdiction cited, the licence number, any cap on withdrawals and the rule about document checks. Every figure has a clause number attached, and that clause number is printed alongside. That is not decoration: it is the reader's opportunity to check whether we read it properly.
Where a licence number was found, we also looked at whether that number could be found again at the issuing body. For four operators that was a certificate from the Curaçao regulator, for three the public register of the Anjouan Gaming Board. At Primedice we found the number only on the operator's own page, and then that is stated alongside it.
What "read" means here
All the data carries a date. For the ten operators in this overview that is 26 August 2026. Terms change, and a clause number of today is not a clause number of next year. Anyone who looks something up and does not find it back has not necessarily found an error — he may have found a change, and that is information too.
There is one more distinction we do not hide away. For some operators the current page was read; for others the text was taken from an archived copy, because the page itself was not reachable. That last applies in this overview to Empire.io, Cloudbet, CoinCasino and Stake. An archived text is a real source, but it is an older source, and the difference ought to be visible.
And then there is the Vave case. At Vave nothing was read — no terms, no country list, no licence page. That stands in our data as "not retrieved" and it produces a row in which every factual field is empty. Vave is this site's paid partner, which makes it the most uncomfortable row in the table and at the same time the best test of whether this method is worth anything.
An empty field is not a zero
This is the most important rule on this site and also the easiest one to break.
If an operator does not publish something, or if we could not read it, then it says "not published". Never a zero, never "unlimited", never a dash that looks like an answer and never an estimated figure. Of the ten operators, three publish a cap on withdrawals that we have read — Bitcasino.io in article 6.10, CoinCasino in article 9.6 and BetPlays in article 6.11. For the other seven there is nothing. That does not mean those seven apply no cap. It means we do not know.
The same rule applies to verification, and there is an extra fold in it that is worth explaining. Two operators name an amount: Bitcasino.io a limit of 2,500 euros in article 6.6, Empire.io a limit of 2,000 USDT in article 5.4. Seven operators describe instead an assessment at their own discretion. That is not a threshold with an unknown value — it is the statement that there is no threshold, and it is therefore a different kind of answer from an empty field. In the table those seven therefore stand as not published, and in the text stands what is there, with the clause number alongside where we could establish it.
There is one place where the rule hurts and where we therefore apply it explicitly: at the partner. Vave has an empty box in every factual field. That is the outcome of the rule and not a choice made afresh for each row.
What makes a licence "checked" here
An operator is only recorded as checked on this site when there is a number. Anyone who names a jurisdiction without a number stands as unverified — that is not an accusation, it is the statement that the claim cannot be followed up.
A seal at the bottom of a casino website is not proof. It is an image on a page the operator manages itself, and that image has been used as a source nowhere on this site.
The same kind of caution applies to the status. Where our data holds a status — active with the four Curaçao OGL numbers, valid with the three Anjouan numbers — that is the status as found on the day of reading. At Primedice there is no status; that field has been left empty rather than our turning it into "valid".
What does not happen here
This site does not play. No account has been opened, no euro or satoshi deposited, no payout requested and no time clocked. That is why there is nowhere a payout time in minutes and nowhere a verdict about customer service. All the terms have been read, not experienced.
That is a limitation and we would rather name it ourselves than have a reader discover it. A clause that has been read says nothing about the average Tuesday evening. It does say what has been agreed, and that is the only thing you can rely on when things go wrong. Anyone who puts both kinds of knowledge side by side sees the whole picture; anyone who reads only passed-on measurements is reading advertising.
Furthermore, this site carries no explanation of how to get around geographical restrictions and no explanation of how to get around exclusion registers. That is not an oversight but a choice, and it applies to cautionary phrasing as well: information does not become less usable by putting "do not do this" above it.
Nor is there any artificial urgency: no offers expiring today, no numbers running out, no countdown clocks. The subject of this site barely changes from week to week, and pretending otherwise would make the rest of this page worthless.
The paid link
This site is paid for out of one link. It leads to Vave, is marked as advertising and carries the coding that tells search engines it is paid. If an account is opened through that link, this site earns from it.
What that does not influence: the order of the table, the content of the articles quoted here, and the question of whether uncomfortable facts about the partner get mentioned. Vave has no licence number in our data, no operating company name, not a single readable source, and its acceptance of Dutch players stands as unverified. That is in the table because it is correct, and not despite the payment.
Anyone who wants to know who makes this site and why it is set up so narrowly will find that on about us.
