The British list is shorter, and the shortness is the point

A page written for one country is usually the same site with fewer things on it, and this one is not, because the condition deciding who appears below is a British licence and not a prize. That is a sturdier claim than an award, for the plain reason that a regulator can take a licence away.

Everything else here speaks to an international readership, where the permissions behind the brands are Maltese, Alderney and Kahnawake ones (none of them British), and where putting those same brands in front of a reader in Great Britain would be an offence under section 330 of the Gambling Act 2005. The licensed houses would pay for that mistake too, since provision 1.1.2 makes an operator answerable for whoever markets on its behalf, so the separation protects them rather than us.

The badge objection, taken at its strongest

Anybody arriving from the rest of this site has earned the right to be sceptical of one more label, because the argument running through these pages is that "award-winning" survives in this trade for want of anybody checking it (a claim we repeat everywhere here). A "licensed" line in a footer costs even less to print than a trophy does, and the answer is not that regulators are more virtuous than magazines.

The answer is narrower: this claim can be settled in a minute, by anybody, against a "public register" the industry neither owns nor edits, which is more than the three pieces behind a badge (the body, the category in its own wording, and the year) ever manage. Nothing else here is as cheap.

The ten sites that hold a British licence

• 

  888 Casino

  UK Gambling Commission, 888 UK Limited

  Visit
• 

  Aladdin Slots

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC

  Visit
• 

  Amazon Slots

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC · registered with the AGCO for Ontario

  Visit
• 

  Big Thunder Slots

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC

  Visit
• 

  Buffalo Spins

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC

  Visit
• 

  Crystal Slots

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC

  Visit
• 

  Dove Slots

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC

  Visit
• 

  Express Wins

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC

  Visit
• 

  The Hippodrome Online Casino

  UK Gambling Commission account 39372, operated by Betway Limited, Gzira (Malta)

  Visit
• 

  Incredible Spins

  UK Gambling Commission account 39175, Jumpman Gaming Limited · Alderney AGCC

  Visit

The rows above carry the ten British sites this site has an arrangement with, and their order is not a ranking of quality or safety, since it is the order of the file that generates them. What each row carries in place of a figure is the "regulatory frame", meaning the regulator and the "licensee" (the company that actually holds the permission, which is rarely the name a player sees).

No row names a bonus, a welcome percentage or free spins, which is the owner's decision of 20 October 2026 (recorded in writing, with the date) and not a British rule, because an affiliate here may lawfully name one. Britain does let an affiliate name a figure, inside limits which grew stricter on 19 January 2026, and a "welcome offer" still ages faster than anything on a casino page.

The search that takes a reader from a website to a company

The register can be searched by name, by "trading name" (a name the licensee declares, and may drop when it likes), by domain or by account number, and the third answers the only question a reader really has, which is who stands behind the address your money is going to. In our reading it is the most useful minute here!

Type the domain into the regulator's own box, open the account it sits under, and write down the company rather than the site. The company is the one that has to answer you when something goes wrong. A withdrawal that never arrived is its responsibility, and a "self-exclusion" (a request to be shut out, which the licensee must honour) that was ignored works the same way.

One company, and eight of the ten names above

Eight of those ten sit on one account on the register (number 39175), whose holder is Jumpman Gaming Limited of La Corvee House in Alderney, and whose permission has covered "remote" casino and bingo since 1 November 2014 and never betting. Only two sit elsewhere, 888 Casino under 888 UK Limited and the Hippodrome as a "white label" of Betway Limited (account 39372), so a reader counting firms here was out threefold.

That one account carries 232 rows of domain (19 active, 84 inactive, 129 "white label", meaning a brand running on another company's licence), and every row is marked "Active", "Inactive" or "White Label" by the business. The Commission warns that it cannot guarantee the accuracy of what the business supplies, which is a caution worth repeating wherever these numbers travel.

Nineteen live domains against a hundred and twenty-nine white label ones is the ratio to remember when somebody sells you a "network" (a brand family, not a group).

Amazon Slots, read in two registers on one day

One name above makes the case better than any argument of ours, because Amazon Slots trades in two markets and the company answerable for it differs in each. In Great Britain the brand is a white label of Jumpman Gaming Limited, licence 039175-R-319452-025, registered at Alderney; in Ontario the address amazonslots.ca is registered to The Six Gaming Limited, which runs Fever Slots in the province as well.

Same name, two companies, two registers (both of them read on 20 October 2026). The consequence is small and worth knowing, because the British link above and the Ontario link on its own page are not the same, and an account opened through one does not exist for the other.

Why nothing recorded is not the same as nothing done

On 17 May 2022 the Commission published the outcome of a review opened on 3 September 2020: a "payment in lieu of a financial penalty" of £500,000, and £13,594 towards the cost of the investigation, for breaches of licence conditions 12.1.1 and 12.1.2 on money laundering, with failures under social responsibility code provisions 3.4.1 on customer interaction and 3.9.1 on multiple accounts. The detail page has since come down, so those figures rest on two independent reports of the time which agree on every element.

Regulatory action stays on the register for a limited period, and on 20 October 2026 the oldest entry we could open reached back only to 14 November 2023, with public statements dropping off after three years. A business page reporting that nothing has been recorded is describing thirty-six months rather than a company's past, so we write it the long way, as "no regulatory action in the Commission's three-year register as at 20 October 2026".

The clumsiness is deliberate, because the short version is a claim nobody has checked; the long version is one anybody can. The Jumpman account page reports nothing at all, and the settlement happened all the same.

What a licence covers, and what it quietly does not

A licence is not a general permission to run games, so the "activity" line (what the permission actually covers) is the second thing to read after the licensee's name, and three of the companies behind these names stop in three different places. Betway Limited holds casino and real-event betting but no bingo whatsoever; Skill On Net Limited holds casino, gaming software, bingo and, only since 1 October 2026, betting on virtual events, with no real-event betting at all; and Jumpman holds no betting licence of any description.

How large the haystack actually is

The Commission counts 2,632 businesses on its register (its own figure, and not one of ours), and the figure a reader of this page wants is narrower: by our count there are 138 active remote casino licences, drawn from 189 rows (33 "surrendered", 14 "pending", 4 "revoked"). That 138 is our arithmetic, not a number the Commission publishes, and the distinction belongs in the sentence, not a footnote.

The domain side punishes careless counting harder, because the register holds 2,227 rows of domain (1,059 active, 816 inactive, 352 white label), so adding the lines would roughly double the live British sites. Those three totals are ours as well.

Eighteen, and the help that owes this page nothing

Great Britain plays from eighteen, and the sturdiest tool available to a worried player is GAMSTOP, at gamstop.co.uk, because one request there (free, and run from outside the trade) reaches every operator the Commission licenses, instead of site by site. GambleAware runs gambleaware.org, which answers to begambleaware.org as well (the same service that replies at two addresses).

GamCare's own page gave the National Gambling Helpline as free on 0808 8020 133, open every hour of every day, when we read it on 20 October 2026. None of the three is paid by a company named above, and a visit to them earns this page nothing.

What a British reader can do from here

The list here is short because the condition is narrow, and the same condition fits any page that ever puts a casino in front of you: find the domain in the register, read the account number and the company holding it, read the "activity" line, then weigh the three-year caveat before you believe in a "clean record". It takes a minute, it costs nothing, and it is the one method here that does not need us at all!

Questions