Which casino licences actually protect you
Almost every casino displays a licence. Very few of them mean what you would assume. A UK or Malta licence gets you a regulator that will take your complaint, fine the operator and shut it down; an Anjouan or Costa Rica one mostly gets you a logo in a footer and a company registration number.
Below is every authority behind the casinos we track, ranked by one question:
if your withdrawal stops arriving, who will actually do something about it?
28 authorities, covering 1741 casino brands
11 authorities with Strict oversight
Learn moreBinding dispute resolution, segregated player funds, published enforcement actions and a regulator that can suspend the licence.
-
Malta Gaming Authority
Malta
-
UK Gambling Commission
United Kingdom
-
Spelinspektionen
Sweden
-
Gemeinsame Glรผcksspielbehรถrde der Lรคnder
Germany
-
Direcciรณn General de Ordenaciรณn del Juego
Spain
-
Kansspelautoriteit
Netherlands
-
Izloลพu un azartspฤฤผu uzraudzฤซbas inspekcija
Latvia
-
Spillemyndigheden
Denmark
-
Belgian Gaming Commission
Belgium
-
Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli
Italy
-
Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario
Canada (Ontario)
8 authorities with Moderate oversight
Learn moreReal supervision and a complaints route, but narrower enforcement reach and less public reporting than tier 1.
-
Gibraltar Licensing Authority
Gibraltar
-
Estonian Tax and Customs Board
Estonia
-
Isle of Man Gambling Supervision Commission
Isle of Man
-
Alderney Gambling Control Commission
Alderney
- Secretaria de Prรชmios e Apostas Brazil
-
Gaming Board for The Bahamas
The Bahamas
-
Gambling Regulatory Authority of Ireland
Ireland
-
Jersey Gambling Commission
Jersey
5 authorities with Limited oversight
Learn moreA named regulator exists and licences can be checked, but dispute adjudication is limited and enforcement is rarely visible.
-
Curaรงao Gaming Control Board
Curaรงao
-
Kahnawake Gaming Commission
Kahnawake, Canada
-
Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation
Philippines
- Secretarรญa de Gobernaciรณn (DGJS) Mexico
-
Antigua and Barbuda Directorate of Offshore Gaming
Antigua and Barbuda
4 authorities with Nominal oversight
Learn moreRegistration rather than supervision. Little or no player-dispute mechanism, so a player's practical recourse is close to none.
-
Anjouan Gaming Board
Comoros
-
Tobique Gaming Commission
Tobique, Canada
- Costa Rica (company registration) Costa Rica
-
Mwali Gaming Authority
Comoros
Not yet classified
54 casinos name something Rixer has not mapped to a known authority โ often a fragment of a longer sentence, or a genuinely obscure body. They are listed unweighted rather than being forced into the nearest tier, because guessing would invent a supervision claim.
Not all licences are equal
A licence is only worth what the regulator will actually do for a player who is not getting paid. Rixer scores the recourse a licence provides, not its existence. These tiers describe the regulator, never the operator's conduct โ a strict licence is not a promise of good behaviour, and a weak one is not proof of bad.
Binding dispute resolution, segregated player funds, published enforcement actions and a regulator that can suspend the licence.
For example UKGC, Malta (MGA), Denmark, Sweden, Ontario (AGCO/iGO), Netherlands (KSA), Germany (GGL), Spain (DGOJ), Italy (ADM)
Real supervision and a complaints route, but narrower enforcement reach and less public reporting than tier 1.
For example Gibraltar, Isle of Man, Alderney, Estonia, Romania, Greece
A named regulator exists and licences can be checked, but dispute adjudication is limited and enforcement is rarely visible.
For example Curaรงao (CGA, post-2024 LOK regime), Kahnawake
Registration rather than supervision. Little or no player-dispute mechanism, so a player's practical recourse is close to none.
For example Anjouan, Tobique, Costa Rica registration, self-declared seals