How we compare betting sites
This page walks through the process we use to compare UK-facing sportsbooks. It covers what we check at each stage and how we translate those observations into an editorial score.
Understanding this process should help you assess how much weight to give our reviews and what to look for when evaluating a product yourself.
We identify UK-facing products
Before reviewing anything, we check that the product is genuinely accessible to UK users and relevant to UK sport. Products must be legally available in Great Britain. We do not review operators that explicitly target non-regulated or unlicensed markets, and we do not promote any operator on the basis of bypassing regulatory protections.
We assess market range and depth
We look at what sports are covered, how many markets are available per event, and whether key UK sports — horse racing, football, cricket, rugby — are treated as primary offerings or as afterthoughts. A product with a broad market list but poor depth on major UK racing days will score lower than one that handles its primary markets well.
We use the interface in realistic conditions
We navigate the product as a typical user would — finding a match, adding a selection, building an accumulator, reviewing account settings. We pay particular attention to how the interface performs when busy, and whether the checkout process is clear or confusing. Good interface design is not about visual aesthetics; it is about reducing the steps needed to complete a common action.
We check mobile performance
Most UK sports bettors use mobile devices, particularly during live events. We test products on mobile browsers and, where an app exists, on the app itself. A polished desktop product that performs poorly on mobile reflects negatively in our score. We look for consistency between platforms and reliable in-play performance.
We review payment options
We note which deposit and withdrawal methods are available, whether there are fees, and what the typical processing times appear to be based on the operator's published information. We do not make payments ourselves, so our assessment of payment processing is based on the information the operator publishes and what can be observed in the product's account section.
We review terms transparency
We look at how clearly the operator explains its account terms, promotional eligibility, and wagering conditions. Terms that are difficult to find, written in dense legal language without plain-English summaries, or buried several clicks deep from the main interface reflect poorly. Operators that make their terms accessible and readable score more favourably.
We check responsible gambling tools
We verify that tools such as deposit limits, session time reminders, and self-exclusion are present and reasonably easy to access from within the account area. We also check that 18+ messaging and links to safer gambling resources are visible at key points in the product. The quality of responsible gambling implementation carries real weight in our scoring.
We form an editorial score
Based on the above assessment, we assign an editorial score on a 10-point scale. The score represents our overall view of the product at the time of review. No product scores a perfect 10 — all products have areas for improvement. Scores are not paid for, not approved by the operator, and not adjusted based on commercial relationships.
Want to understand more?
For the full details behind our scoring and editorial independence commitments, see our editorial review policy. For information on affiliate relationships, see the affiliate disclosure page.