Seventy-four territories, and why they became the yardstick here

The island on the licence is inside the list

Curaçao appears among the 74. BitStarz trades under a Curaçao Gaming Authority permit, OGL/2024/165/0185.

This is not an oddity of one operator. Every one of the eleven territory documents gathered for this comparison names Curaçao, and several of those operators hold Curaçao permits of their own. The pattern is consistent enough to be a feature of how these licences work rather than a quirk of drafting: a permit to serve players abroad is commonly paired with an exclusion of players at home.

For a reader it is a useful calibration. The list is a commercial and regulatory document about where an operator will trade, and its contents follow licensing arrangements at least as much as they follow anything about the countries named.

What kind of document this is

A territory clause states whom an operator will accept as a customer. It is a term of a contract, written by one party to it, and revisable by that party.

It is not legislation, it is not a regulator’s ruling, and it carries no information about what a person in any of the 74 places may lawfully do. Those questions are settled by national and sometimes regional law, they move on their own timetable, and this site states a position for no country at all. The distinction matters here more than usual, because the same list gets reprinted elsewhere under headings that quietly convert a company’s commercial preference into a legal claim.

Why this list became the measure for the whole site

Five candidate signals for similarity were considered, and four of them resist counting. Game libraries come from shared aggregators, so an apparent match is a fact about a supplier. Audience overlap comes from modelled estimates rather than from meters. Bonus shape is a description, not a quantity. A shared licensing authority puts most of this industry in one bucket and separates nobody.

The territory list survives all four objections. The operator writes it. It is published. It is a set of discrete names, so two of them can be crossed against each other mechanically. And crucially, it produces a fraction rather than an adjective — a numerator that can be printed beside a denominator, on every row, where a reader can check both.

That is the entire argument for the choice, and its result is the 30 points the overlap carries in the seven-check total described on the measure.

Twenty-six names that every measured list repeats

Crossed against the ten further lists gathered for this comparison, the 74 entries sort themselves by how uniform they are.

Twenty-six names appear in all ten of the other lists as well as the BitStarz one. Among them are the United States, Israel, Ukraine and Curaçao, and they behave as a common core of the offshore casino contract rather than as anything characteristic of BitStarz.

Another twenty-four appear in nine of the ten. At the far end, two names are close to solitary: Sudan is named in eight other lists, Russia in four, and Brazil in two. Brazil is the least uniform entry in the whole comparison, and it is one of the names that separates several operators from BitStarz by a point or two.

So the measure has structure inside it. Roughly two thirds of the 74 are shared by nearly everyone and distinguish nobody; the discrimination between operators happens in the last quarter of the list.

Where the yardstick goes blunt

Three limits belong on the record.

The count runs in one direction. Several operators here publish lists two hundred entries long, so repeating 72 of the BitStarz 74 can coexist with a hundred and fifty entries that have no counterpart on the BitStarz side. The reverse fraction is always the more restrictive-looking one, and both are printed on the comparison pages.

Coverage is partial. Fifty operators went through the checks and twenty-nine publish a list that could be read; the remaining twenty-one carry nothing to compare. Those rows lose zero points for it, because an unread document is a gap in our record and never a finding about the operator.

And every figure is dated. These pages are revised at the operator’s initiative, usually without an announcement. The 74 stands as read on 26 August 2026, and anyone acting on it should open the terms in force on the day the money would move.

Everything built on this denominator sits one click away. Ten operators put in order shows what the division produces. Three of those rows are read closely: Oshi Casino, PlayAmo and 7Bit Casino. Payout ceilings have a page of their own, the weights are on the scoring rules, and the home comparison carries the shortlists.