Sixty-nine of 74, from a brand whose sibling reaches seventy-one

Slotum repeats 69 of the 74 countries BitStarz excludes and scores 58 of 100, seventh of the fifty operators measured here. Bitkingz trades under the same Anjouan permit number, held by the same company, and repeats 71. Two brands, one licence, two documents that disagree about five names between them.

Sixty-nine of 74, and the sibling on 71

Slotum repeats 69 of the 74 countries named in the BitStarz restricted-territory list, and totals 58 points of 100 across the seven checks. That places it seventh of fifty.

Bitkingz repeats 71 and totals 49. The two brands carry the same Anjouan Gaming Board permit number, ALSI-202508056-FI2, and the same holder, Novatrix SRL, as recorded on 26 August 2026.

One licence, one company, and two documents that do not agree with each other. That disagreement is the subject of this page, because it is the finding most likely to mislead a reader who has not seen it.

A drawing of a fennec fox in a pale blue coat holding a large printed sheet open in both paws and reading it — A drawing, made for this page — an illustration rather than anyone’s screen. One sheet, because the 74 names on it were read off one page on one day rather than assembled from several sources. The groups above are our sorting of that single list, not headings BitStarz prints: 16 of the 27 European Union member states are named and 11 are absent, and nine French overseas departments and collectivities appear in full. A sweep that complete through one country’s overseas codes is the signature of a compliance data set rather than of a hand-written policy.

Five names, and three that no sibling omits

The countries BitStarz excludes and Slotum does not are Barbados, Brazil, Cyprus, Puerto Rico and Russia.

Two of the five are unremarkable. Brazil is missing from every comparison document in this group, and Russia from most of them, which points at a shared drafting habit rather than a decision by any one operator.

The other three are what separate Slotum from its sibling. Barbados, Cyprus and Puerto Rico all appear in the Bitkingz terms and in the Mirax terms. Slotum is the single document among the three that leaves each of them out, and those three absences are the entire difference between 69 and 71.

What each operator publishes about itself: the company named on the licence, the permit number and where it was read, and how many countries the operator excludes in its own terms. Similarity here is a count with a denominator printed beside it — BitStarz names 74 countries, and an operator's overlap is stated as a share of those 74. An operator whose own list was not read carries nothing to compare rather than a low score, because an unread list is not evidence of difference. An empty cell means the document was not read — it is not a zero, and it is not a permission.
Casino	Operator	Licence	Countries barred	Withdrawal limit	Visit
Vavepaid placement	TechOptions Group B.V.	Curaçao no number	list not read	from 50,000 USDT in instalments cl. 8.8	Visit
BitStarz	Gareton B.V.	Curaçao Gaming Authority	74	not published
Oshi Casino	Novatrix SRL	Anjouan Gaming Board	224	not published
PlayAmo	Novatrix SRL	Anjouan Gaming Board	217	not published
Bitdreams	Hollycorn N.V.	Antillephone N.V.	216	not published
7Bit Casino	not published	Curaçao Gaming Authority	216	not published
Bitkingz	Novatrix SRL	Anjouan Gaming Board	218	not published
Mirax	Scores55 Tech B.V.	Curaçao Gaming Authority	220	not published
Slotum	Novatrix SRL	Anjouan Gaming Board	216	not published
Metaspins	3-102-959384 SRL	Curaçao Gaming Authority	58	not published
CryptoLeo	Uno Digital Media B.V.	Curaçao Gaming Authority	74	not published
Bets.io	Techno Wave Systems S.R.L.	Curaçao Gaming Authority	42	not published

Cyprus

Cyprus deserves a sentence of its own, because it is a European Union member state and because the pattern around it is unusually clean.

BitStarz names it. Bitkingz names it. Mirax names it. Slotum, drafted under the identical permit to Bitkingz and by the same company, does not. There is no note in either document explaining the divergence, and none is supplied here — the record consists of one presence, one absence, and the date each was read.

What the case demonstrates is narrow and important. Two brands can share a regulator, a permit number and a corporate owner, and still publish different answers about a single named country. The territory clause is not inherited from the licence. It is written per brand.

One number, four documents, four lengths

Set the four Novatrix SRL brands side by side and the point stops being anecdotal. Oshi Casino names 224 territories. Bitkingz names 218. PlayAmo names 217. Slotum names 216.

Four lists, four lengths, four different sets of omissions against the BitStarz reference: Oshi at 72 of 74, PlayAmo at 72, Bitkingz at 71, Slotum at 69. Fourteen points of spread separate the best and worst totals within a single licensed company.

A shared permit fixes real things — the issuing authority, the register entry, the route a complaint would take. It does not fix the country list, and the common assumption that sister sites operate under identical rules is a prediction these four documents refuse.

Fifteen thousand a week, and two blanks

Clause 13 of the Slotum terms publishes a withdrawal ceiling of 15,000 euro or dollars a week. It is the highest figure recorded anywhere in this pool.

The nearby readings are 10,000 euro a week from Mirax under clause 8, 7,500 euro a week from PlayAmo under clause 12, and 4,000 euro a day from Oshi under clause 12 as well. Two brands on the Slotum permit therefore publish ceilings under nearly the same clause number over different windows, and restating a daily figure as a weekly one produces a number the contract never uses.

The Bitkingz and BitStarz cells are both empty. An empty cell here means the document was not read on that point. It is not a zero, it is not a finding of no limit, and it is not permission to assume one.

Fifty-eight points, and the forty-two not awarded

Slotum collected 28 of the 30 points available for territory overlap, 10 for having a VIP programme, 10 for being a casino with no sportsbook, and 10 for verification posture — its terms describe identity checks, allow a phone call as part of the process, and attach no monetary threshold, which is the same undefined shape the BitStarz terms use.

Nothing was awarded on three checks. Fifteen points for a shared licensing authority went unpaid, because BitStarz answers to the Curaçao Gaming Authority under permit OGL/2024/165/0185 and Slotum to the Anjouan Gaming Board. Fifteen for a shared licence holder went the same way, Gareton B.V. against Novatrix SRL. Ten for original in-house games were not awarded either.

Those two regulatory checks are worth 30 points between them, and losing both is what holds a document that agrees with BitStarz about 69 territories to a mid-table total.

What the measure leaves out

Everything a player encounters after depositing sits outside this page: the game library, the cashier, how quickly a payout clears, how support answers. None of it is measured, none is asserted, and no account was opened with either operator.

Two neighbouring comparisons carry the argument further. Bitkingz under the same permit is the direct counterpart to this one, and PlayAmo at the top of the overlap column completes the picture inside the shared licence. The ceilings gathered in one place are on the withdrawal limits page. The weights behind each check are on the scoring rules, and the ranked table opens on Points of Match.

Questions people actually type

How similar is Slotum to BitStarz?

Of the 74 countries BitStarz names in its terms, 69 also appear in the Slotum terms, both read on 26 August 2026. That is the lowest of the three closely compared brands and still a high figure in the wider pool. The full measure puts Slotum on 58 of 100, seventh of fifty, with the licensing authority and the licence holder both awarding nothing.

Are Slotum and Bitkingz the same operator?

Both permits record Anjouan Gaming Board number ALSI-202508056-FI2 and the holder Novatrix SRL, read from the public register on 26 August 2026. PlayAmo and Oshi Casino sit on that number too. The four brands publish four territory lists of four different lengths, so a shared permit predicts the paperwork rather than the policy.

Which countries does BitStarz exclude that Slotum does not?

Five: Barbados, Brazil, Cyprus, Puerto Rico and Russia. Brazil and Russia are absent from the sibling documents as well. Barbados, Cyprus and Puerto Rico are named by Bitkingz and by Mirax and left out by Slotum alone, which is what separates 69 from 71.

What is the Slotum withdrawal limit?

Clause 13 sets 15,000 euro or dollars a week, read on 26 August 2026. That is the highest ceiling recorded in this pool, against 10,000 euro a week for Mirax, 7,500 for PlayAmo under clause 12 and 4,000 a day for Oshi under the same clause number. The Bitkingz and BitStarz cells are blank, which records an unread document rather than an absent ceiling.