Evidence before opinion.
Every published score should be read with its dated source status and limitations. This page explains the evaluation framework and what current records can — and cannot — establish.
One framework. Evidence disclosed.
Published reviews use the evidence available for that operator and disclose important limitations. The public record, material terms, payment information and support evidence are assessed consistently; a review is not a guarantee of future operator behaviour.
Where test or source records exist, dated findings and material limitations should be traceable to them. Record retention follows the applicable operational and legal schedule rather than an unqualified public promise.
Judgement, informed by evidence.
The Editor Score is editorial judgement grounded in available evidence — not the output of a fixed arithmetic formula, and no percentage weighting should be inferred from it. The ordering of influence, however, is stable and public: payout reliability weighs heaviest, honesty of terms second, everything else after.
Some substantiated findings can cap an assessment rather than add weight, including unresolved non-payment evidence, material withdrawal failure or marketing that misrepresents operator terms.
When eligible published records exist, the #1 pick reflects the strongest current combination under the disclosed ranking method. Missing or incomplete evidence fails closed, and the selection can change when authoritative data changes.
Alternatives are chosen to answer materially different needs — lower wagering, lower deposit floor — not to enumerate rank positions or pad the page. Use-case shortlists on Casinos and Bonuses follow the same rule, capped at three operators each. Affiliate compensation does not determine Editor Score or natural editorial ranking.
Editorial scoring and commercial availability are separate application concerns. Affiliate compensation does not determine Editor Score or natural editorial ranking.
Programme and Help activity is not used to target offers, personalise rankings or feed advertising. Current product controls keep those purposes separate.
A review is only as useful as its source status and date. Published records show evidence dates where available, and credible corrections are assessed against authoritative sources.
An honest methodology admits what it can't do. Findings reflect the disclosed sources or dated observations available for a particular jurisdiction and context — snapshots, not guarantees.