Our review process starts with verification
A sister-site claim needs evidence of the relationship it describes. These are the criteria for reviewing information on Universal Sisters; they are not a guarantee that every fact on every page has been confirmed. Use each page’s sources and review notes to understand what was checked and what remains uncertain.
We distinguish a shared parent company from the company that operates a particular casino, and from a shared software or game supplier. Similar designs, matching payment logos and overlapping games are not enough to establish common ownership.
The most useful sources are the operator named in a casino’s current terms, the parent company’s published brand portfolio or acquisition statements, and relevant regulator records. When sources describe different dates, companies or countries, the distinction matters. An earlier ownership announcement is not proof that the same arrangement continues today.
What we check on sister-site pages
Brand and operator identity: the exact website, the company named in its account terms and evidence connecting that company to the wider group. A relationship should not be presented as confirmed solely because another comparison site lists the brands together.
Licence and country context: which company or website a record covers, and whether the claim applies to the reader’s country. A licence reference is not a worldwide permission to accept customers. The language of a page or casino interface does not establish eligibility.
Account and offer details: bonuses, wagering conditions, payment methods, withdrawal requirements and exclusion rules need their own sources. They should not be copied from one sister brand to another. A reviewed relationship does not mean a withdrawal was personally tested or an offer is available to every visitor.
Uncertainty: missing or conflicting information should remain qualified. A last-checked date describes the stated review scope; it does not turn every surrounding claim, image or casino card into a verified fact.
How guide and network pages are reviewed
A network page should explain the group relationship and link to the company evidence behind it. A guide should help a reader interpret that evidence or complete a practical check. Neither should imply that every brand under a parent company shares the same licence, customer support, payment policy or self-exclusion arrangements.
Source links should support the adjacent claim and lead to accessible material. Internal links should lead to a relevant, published page. A working page does not need to appear in an XML sitemap to be a useful link, and official source links can go directly to the relevant company or regulator website.
Casino grids are separate from the evidence for a relationship. A listed comparison brand is not automatically a sister site, and its placement does not establish safety or suitability. For help if gambling is causing harm, use the support resources.
If a company has changed hands, a source has disappeared or a statement is wrong, send us the page URL, the disputed detail and a supporting source. See About Universal Sisters for the site’s purpose and language coverage.
FAQs
Does using the same software make two casinos sister sites?
Shared software alone does not establish common ownership. Check who operates each brand and what company records or operator terms say about the specific relationship.
Does a casino card mean the brand has been personally tested?
A card or its position on a page does not establish personal testing, safety or customer eligibility. Read the sources and review notes for the scope of the checks described.
How can I report an ownership change or an outdated source?
Use the Contact page to send the affected URL, the statement that needs checking and a current source. A change of owner, operator or licence holder needs evidence for that particular fact.