A Crypto Casino Licence Check, Register by Register, for the Ranked Casinos

The licence each ranked casino shows

The table above repeats each result with its note, and the fact boxes on the full list carry the same licence lines. In words, seven of the twelve have a register entry that matches the casino's own domain.

Moon Technologies B.V. is the company behind Bitcasino.io, with a certificate numbered OGL/2023/111/0069 and dated 1 July 2024; on 12 September 2026 the search returned bitcasino.io under that number. Shuffle.com belongs to Natural Nine B.V. under OGL/2024/1337/0628, issued 16 October 2024, found in a search on 8 September 2026. Bitsler's OGL/2024/930/0387 was issued to Oyine N.V. on 22 July 2024 and covered bitsler.com when searched on 12 September 2026, even though Bitsler's terms still describe the number as an application.

Thunderpick's OGL/2024/677/0722 shows as active in the register, yet its terms name no authority and print no number, so the only way to find it is the domain search. Jack.com, called Jackbit until 29 May 2026, appears in the register through Data Link Digital B.V., whose certificate OGL/2024/1562/1139 dates from 23 July 2025 and names jack.com; the older jackbit.com domain has a separate certificate. Wild.io earns its register point too, but with two company names in play, covered below.

Wild Fortune is the one Anjouan entry that matches. Metlait SRL was issued ALSI-202509073-FI2 on 30 September 2025, with an end date of 29 September 2026, and the register linked it to wildfortune.io on 12 September 2026.

Where the crypto casino licence check found gaps

Five ranked casinos miss the register point, each for a different reason. Rocketpot quotes 1668/JAZ in clause 1.2; the Curaçao portal marked that number not valid in a lookup of 12 September 2026 and in a repeat lookup of 13 September 2026. Metaspins prints Anjouan number ALSI-202606048-FI2 in clause 1.1, while a Curaçao search on 12 September 2026 turned up OGL/2024/1063/0437 for Metaspins N.V., shown as active, with metaspins.com as its domain; the two records point to different authorities and have not been reconciled.

Rainbet's footer seal carries no number at all, and its clause 21.6 names Gaming Services Provider N.V. for licensing. The Anjouan number ALSI-132405048-FI3 opens Wolfbet's terms at clause 1 §1 and turns up again in the site footer, but the register did not show that licence against the casino's domain. TrustDice's licence cell is —.

Wild.io takes the point, but the names split. On the certificate the holder reads Nonce Gaming B.V., whereas the company the terms speak for is Stack Gaming Ltd, and both stay on the page without a guess as to which is correct. The page on licence holders and brand names that part ways goes through these mismatches one at a time.

Latcas B.V. has held OGL/2024/1676/0905 since 19 May 2025, and on 12 September 2026 the portal showed vavegame.com as the only domain under that number, with vave.com missing from the entry.

Why the licence is the fifth point

The figure above counts how many of the twelve meet each of the five criteria. Four of them concern the identity-check clause in the terms: whether there is one, when it starts, at what sum, and the deadline for documents. The fifth asks whether the register shows the licence against the casino's own domain.

That item earns its place for a practical reason. The terms are a contract with a named company, and the register is the public record of that company's licence. When the two point to the same holder and the same domain, you know whom you are dealing with if a large withdrawal is held. When they do not, a complaint about a held sum may have no clear address. The scoring method explains the other four items and how ties are ordered.

What a register entry proves, and what it does not

A matching entry proves that a named company held a licence number on the day of the search and that the domain was attached to it. It does not tell you the smallest request, the amount at which documents are asked for, a cap per week or month, or the line above which a win is paid in parts. None of those figures sits in a register.

So a clean result is where reading starts, not where it ends. Bitcasino.io and Shuffle.com both pass this check, yet one writes €2,500 into its identity clause (6.6) and the other gives no amount at all. Rocketpot fails it, yet its terms set out a documents band of $2,000 to $2,500 (11.4, 12.4) and a document deadline of 30 calendar days (12.2). A crypto casino licence check and a reading of the withdrawal clauses answer different questions, and a reader planning a large request needs both.

The licence and the size of your withdrawal

The cards above place every written amount on the four floors of the amount ladder. The licence does not appear on any floor, but it matters more the higher your sum climbs. A €50 request that stalls is an annoyance; a sum that meets Wild Fortune's monthly parts above €15,000 (11.8) or Rocketpot's $5,000 a month from a $5,000 win (11.5) can stay with the operator for a long stretch, and that is when you want to know which company holds the licence.

Before a large deposit, run the lookup yourself, save a screenshot with the date, and keep the terms version you accepted. If a withdrawal is later held, those three items tell you which company to write to and which clause to quote. The page on holds sorted by amount covers what to send.

Dates that need a second look

Register results age. Certificates get renewed, domains are added or dropped, and a holder can change its name, so a result from one month is only a starting point the next. Wild Fortune's Anjouan licence reaches its end date on 29 September 2026, so that entry has to be searched again after that day before it is shown as valid. Rocketpot's result was seen on two separate days because a single not-valid reading could have been a portal fault; both days gave the same answer.

Every other entry carries its search date, from 8 to 13 September 2026, and is repeated when the table is rebuilt. If you run your own lookup and get a different result from the one shown here, the later date is the one to trust, and the page about the editors explains how corrections are made.