Editorial Policy The Standards Behind Every Page

Why this page exists

Most of what we publish is checkable. This casino runs that build of that slot, at that return, on that date. Either it's true or it isn't, and a reader can verify it in about ten seconds by opening the game.

That's an unusual position for an affiliate site to put itself in, and it only works if we're explicit about our standards. This page is that. It's written to be held against us.

Where figures come from

Deployed RTP is read from the game

The return a casino runs appears in that game's own information panel — paytable, info screen or help file, depending on the studio. Verifying it means opening the game at that specific operator and reading what's displayed. That's what we do, and it's the only source we treat as authoritative for a deployed figure.

Certified RTP comes from the developer

The studio's published specification is taken from its own documentation. This is the ceiling a casino can license up to, not a guarantee of what any operator runs.

We never take deployed figures from other sites

A number republished from a third party carries no date, no named casino and no way to know whether it was ever checked. Where we show a certified specification rather than a verified deployed build, it is labelled as such rather than presented as the same thing.

Every figure carries a date

Operators renegotiate licensing and switch builds without announcement. An undated RTP figure tells you nothing about whether it still holds, so every entry records when it was taken.

Who checks what

Three named editors are responsible for what appears here, and each page carries a byline.

Tony Sartori carries out the per-casino verification and writes the individual slot pages. Mark Gruetze owns the methodology those checks follow, the volatility classification, and the mathematics behind the calculators. Jon Pill owns editorial direction and reviews every page against these standards before it goes live.

No page is published on one person's say-so. Technical claims are reviewed by Mark, slot-level accuracy by Tony, and scope and presentation by Jon.

Commercial interests

We earn commission

When a reader signs up to a casino through some of our links, we're paid for it. That is how this site is funded, and we'd rather state it plainly than bury it.

It does not move the numbers

An RTP figure is read from the game's information panel and is what it is regardless of who pays us. No operator can buy a higher position in a ranking built on returns, because the ranking is the data.

It does affect which casinos we cover first

We're not going to pretend otherwise. Coverage tends to start with operators we have a commercial relationship with, because that's how affiliate sites work. What it doesn't affect is the figure we publish once we've checked one, or whether we'll say a casino runs poor builds when it does.

We don't accept payment for reviews, rankings or scores

Any arrangement that would change a published figure or position is one we don't take.

Corrections

We fix things and say so

When a figure is wrong or has gone stale, it's corrected and the date noted on the affected page. We don't quietly overwrite errors.

Reader corrections are welcome and useful

If a number in a game's information panel doesn't match what we've published, tell us — the game in front of you is more current than anything we publish, and a reader flagging a build change is often how we find out about it. Send the slot, the casino and what you're seeing via the contact page.

Some things we won't publish rather than guess

Where a game's panel omits the return, or states a certified range rather than the build in play, the entry stays unpublished. We would rather have a smaller database that's accurate than a large one that's inferred.

Use of AI

We use AI tools in our research and drafting process, and we'd rather disclose that than let you find it out.

Where AI is used

Consolidating sources, structuring research, and producing initial drafts of explanatory content. Tony Sartori's review workflow uses AI assistance for exactly this.

Where it is not

AI does not generate RTP figures, verify deployed builds, or produce factual claims that aren't independently sourced. No number on this site comes from a model. Every figure is read from a game by a person.

What we require of it

Every claim in AI-assisted content is independently verifiable, and every published page is fact-checked by a second editor before it goes live. Where a claim can't be sourced, it doesn't survive review.

What we don't do

We don't publish AI-generated author personas, fabricated bylines, or content presented as first-hand experience that isn't.

Responsible gambling

This is commercial content about gambling, and that carries obligations we take seriously.

No outcome claims

RTP is a long-run theoretical average across millions of spins by every player combined. It does not predict any individual session, and we don't imply otherwise. We don't publish systems, strategies for games that have none, or any suggestion that a slot is due.

Honest downsides

Every category page states what that type of game costs you as well as what it offers. High-volatility slots carry a materially higher chance of losing a balance in one session, and we say so on the page selling them.

Age and support

All content is for over-18s. BeGambleAware is referenced throughout, and our responsible gambling page sets out the support available.

Self-exclusion

We state plainly where operators fall outside national self-exclusion schemes, and we don't present offshore sites as a route around them.

Coverage and its limits

Our database is smaller than sites publishing studio specifications alone. That's deliberate — manual verification scales with time, not servers, and those sites are publishing a ceiling while calling it a fact.

Coverage grows toward the slots and casinos most people actually use. Rechecks run on a rolling basis, weighted toward popular games and operators known to switch builds. The full method, including its failure modes, is set out in How We Verify.

Contact

Corrections, coverage requests, and anything else: contact us. Reader corrections take priority over everything else in the queue.

Last updated: July 2026