Which game providers appear at almost all 28?
27 of the 28 list Pragmatic Play and 25 list Evolution. Behind the 28 lists stand 22 companies — written 26 different ways.
Which studios recur, and at how many of the 28?
Pragmatic Play appears at 27 of 28 and Evolution at 25. After that the curve drops fast: NetEnt at 18, Play'n GO at 17 and Hacksaw Gaming at 14.
The middle holds BGaming and Nolimit City at nine each, Betsoft at seven, Yggdrasil at five, and Big Time Gaming and Relax Gaming at four. Endorphina, Ezugi, Playtech, Red Tiger and Spinomenal appear at three each, Microgaming and Spribe at two.
Four studios are named by a single casino each: PG Soft by Wild.io, Playson by CryptoLeo, Quickspin by Winz.io and Slotmill by BetPanda.io. The tail is short — the entire variation across 28 sites fits into four names.
Which casino has no Pragmatic Play, and which three have no Evolution?
Cloudbet is the only one of the 28 that does not list Pragmatic Play. Its list is Evolution Gaming, Betsoft, Hacksaw Gaming, Play'n GO, Relax Gaming and Red Tiger instead.
Three do not list Evolution under either of the company's two spellings: 7Bit Casino, Lucky Block and Winz.io. They are the only three of 28 whose published list omits the largest live supplier in the business.
Ten of the 28 do not name NetEnt and eleven do not name Play'n GO. It is at the fourth name that the lists genuinely begin to differ — and not before.
How alike are the lists?
24 of the 28 list both Pragmatic Play and Evolution. Nine list all four of the largest: BC.Game, Bets.io, Bitstarz, Coins.Game, Katsubet, King Billy Casino, Metaspins, Vave and Woo Casino.
Of the 378 possible pairs among the 28, twenty-six pairs share at least five of six names. BC.Game and Metaspins publish exactly the same six studios — Pragmatic Play, Evolution, NetEnt, Play'n GO, Hacksaw Gaming and Nolimit City — while having nothing else in common in the table.
The length of the lists barely varies either: 23 of the 28 write six names, four write five, and one, FortuneJack, writes four.
Why do 22 companies become 26 names in the table?
Counted as raw strings, the 28 lists give 26 different supplier names. Counted as companies, they give 22. The difference is four spellings: “Evolution” and “Evolution Gaming”, “Betsoft” and “BetSoft”, “Nolimit City” and “NoLimit City”, plus “Pragmatic Play Live”, which is a product line inside Pragmatic Play.
Without that merge Evolution lands on 20 rather than 25 and falls below NetEnt, which sits at 18. The top of the list changes order because of one capital letter.
So the figures on this page are post-merge, and the four merges are written out. A ranking whose method cannot be read is a ranking that cannot be checked.
How long are the lists, and what is not counted?
The published lists carry four to six names each, 5.8 on average. Duelbits is the only casino that writes out both “Pragmatic Play” and “Pragmatic Play Live” — six names, five companies.
A list like that is a selection the operator chose to put forward, not a complete catalogue. A studio missing from the list does not prove it is missing from the game menu, and a studio present says nothing about how many of its titles are actually live.
What can be counted, then, is what the operators say, not what the shelf holds.
What does a game count between 3,000 and 13,000 tell you?
The game counts in the table run from 3,000 to 13,000. Five casinos state 3,000 — Cloudbet, Duelbits, Metaspins, Rocketpot and Stake.com — while BetFury states 13,000 and Woo Casino 10,500.
None of the 28 publishes its counting method. Nowhere does it say whether each table variant counts separately, whether the same slot in two currencies becomes two titles, or whether a supplier's full catalogue is counted when only part of it is switched on.
The number can be quoted but not compared. A page that sets 13,000 against 3,000 as though it were one yardstick is comparing two different counts.
A game count with no stated method is a fact about the marketing, not about the shelf.
How often does a provider list exist at all in the wider library?
These 28 rows are unusually well filled on this particular field. In the wider library of 100 brands, only eight records carry a provider list at all.
That is why the field weighs so little when operators are scored across the network: charging 92 brands for a page that was never opened would only scale every score down by the same amount.
An empty field means the list was not read, not that the casino has no suppliers.
If the games are the same, what separates the rows?
When 27 of 28 carry the same principal supplier and 25 the same live supplier, the choice cannot rest on the game selection. Two sites in different colours can hold almost the same shelf, and the difference sits in the documents around it.
Three fields there genuinely differ: the withdrawal cap and the thirteen published amounts, the licence number and the company behind the sign, and the verification requirement.
The full table of the 28 and the read-throughs casino by casino are where those fields stand side by side.