How We Rate Online Casinos
We publish two different scores. The composite out of 100 aggregates independent rating sources. Our editorial rating out of 5 is a separate judgement that also considers enforcement, banking, bonus terms and the product itself.
Casino Guru’s Safety Index, AskGamblers, Trustpilot and the App Store / Google Play scores, normalized to one scale and weighted by review volume so a thin page can’t out-shout a deep one.
Every AGCO penalty, order or warning is shown in the review and considered in our editorial rating out of 5. It does not enter composite formula v2.
Published withdrawal times, fees, Interac support and KYC are reviewed separately and inform our editorial rating out of 5, not the composite.
We calculate the required playthrough and examine the terms separately. That analysis informs our editorial rating out of 5, not the composite.
Two scores, two jobs
Composite formula v2 normalizes each external rating to 100, applies a source-type weight, and reduces the influence of crowd scores with small review counts. Crowd sources with fewer than 10 reviews are excluded. The result is a directional view of external reputation, not our own verdict. Our editorial rating is shown separately on each review and can differ when the regulator record, payout terms, bonus conditions or product quality point another way.
Confidence: how much weight to put on the number
A score is only as good as the evidence under it, so every profile carries a confidence level. We don’t publish a composite until an operator has at least two usable independent rating sources.
- High confidence means several independent sources agree, usually a well-reviewed, long-running brand.
- Medium means the picture is solid but thinner, often a newer launch that’s licensed but hasn’t built a long public record yet.
- Low means only one usable rating source is present, so the composite is withheld and the detail matters more than a headline number.
Right now 64 of the 73 casinos we score are cross-checked against two or more independent rating sources, and the average published score is 76 out of 100.
What we don’t do
We don’t claim to deposit real money and time a withdrawal at every site every week. That would be theatre. The composite stays an external-rating aggregate. We publish the payout time each operator states for each method, the regulatory record and the bonus terms as separate evidence, and use them in the editorial review. Where a figure is an estimate rather than an operator’s stated number, we say so on the page.
We also don’t sell position. A casino cannot pay to rank higher. There is no paid-placement input in the scoring method. If an operator has a fine on record, the fine stays in the review. The full independence policy is on the affiliate disclosure page.
What it takes to be listed at all
Inclusion is the first filter, before any scoring. An operator must be authorized to accept legal play in Canada: registered with the AGCO and operating under an agreement with iGaming Ontario, or listed in the AiGC Registered iGaming Sites directory for Alberta. An AGLC registration without AiGC launch approval remains pending context and is not presented as a live casino. Offshore and “Curaçao” sites are left off because there’s no Canadian regulator standing behind them if something goes wrong.
When the scores change
Ratings, payout times, bonuses and licences all move, so we re-check the data on a regular cycle and more often around big events like new launches. Each casino profile carries the date it was last reviewed, so you can see how fresh the number is.
Want the bigger picture? Read about the site, see the method applied on the best online casinos ranking, or open any casino review to see the signals for a single operator.