Roobet vs Stake: the documented differences
Every difference below traces to a dated source: welcome-offer terms, payment coverage, licence and platform facts. Unknown stays unknown, and nothing is aggregated into a safety score. The full 20-area research record for both casinos follows the comparison.
Welcome offer, documented
Mechanism on record: rakeback. The checked source did not establish full offer terms; see the source check
Mechanism on record: rakeback. The checked source did not establish full offer terms; see the source check
Decision areas, side by side
The seven areas a depositor checks first, each with its research status and latest dated check. Statuses measure research coverage, never quality, and never combine into a rating.
| Area | Roobet | Stake |
|---|---|---|
| Licence | Documented · 2026-09-13 | Documented · 2026-09-13 |
| Payment routes | Documented · 2026-09-12 | Documented · 2026-08-02 |
| Deposit terms | Documented · 2026-09-12 | Partial · 2026-08-02 |
| Withdrawal terms | Partial · 2026-09-12 | Partial · 2026-08-01 |
| Bonus terms | Partial · 2026-09-12 | Partial · 2026-08-02 |
| KYC / verification | Partial · 2026-09-12 | Partial · 2026-08-02 |
| Cashout observation | Partial | Partial |
What the documented record separates
- Bonus mechanism: Roobet's recorded mechanism is rakeback; the checked source did not establish full terms. Stake's recorded mechanism is rakeback; the checked source did not establish full terms. A player comparing headline bonuses cannot verify either offer from the checked sources today.
- Research depth on RTP Ledger: Roobet's record has source-backed claims in 9 of 20 areas. Stake's record has source-backed claims in 16 of 20 areas. Where a record is thin, verify directly with the operator before depositing.
Roobet
- Research tier
- Source-reviewed record
- Areas with source support
- 9/20
- Source-linked statements
- 16
- First-party test areas
- 0
- Unique sources
- 16
- Latest dated evidence
- 2026-09-13
Stake
- Research tier
- Source-reviewed record
- Areas with source support
- 16/20
- Source-linked statements
- 46
- First-party test areas
- 0
- Unique sources
- 17
- Latest dated evidence
- 2026-09-13
Every decision area, including the gaps
A source link supports only the scope stated in its cell. Published rules are not treated as an RTP Ledger account test, and no dated source means the area remains explicitly unresearched.
| Evidence area | Roobet | Stake |
|---|---|---|
| 01Legal operator identity | Documented· 1 supported statement The footer names Raw Entertainment B.V., company number 157205, at Korporaalweg 10, Curaçao. The privacy policy (Section 1) restates the same name, number and address. The Curaçao Gaming Authority certificate independently names the same company and company number for roobet.com. The privacy policy footer also names a separate group company, Raw Entertainment Ltd, company number HE421735, registered in Limassol, Cyprus. That Cyprus company acts as a paying and operational agent for Raw Entertainment B.V. It is not the licensed operator. Checked 2026-09-12 | Documented· 1 supported statement The operator and regulator records bind Medium Rare N.V. to stake.com. Checked 2026-08-02 |
| 02Licence and domain coverage | Documented· 1 supported statement The footer states a licence from the Government of Curaçao under number OGL/2024/687/0427. The footer's certificate badge links to cert.gcb.cw, which redirects to the Curaçao Gaming Authority's certificate portal at cert.cga.cw. That certificate names roobet.com, Raw Entertainment B.V. and company number 157205. It shows licence number OGL/2024/687/0427, a grant date of 31/07/2024 and a current status of Active. Discrepancy: an earlier research pass recorded HTTP 403 Forbidden for the same footer link fetched without following the redirect. The 2026-09-12 re-check followed the redirect and reached HTTP 200 with the certificate text. This claim record does not explain why the two checks differ. The Curaçao Gaming Control Board's bulk licence registry PDF, dated 2026-09-10, lists the same licence number, company and company number with the status Indefinite. Checked 2026-09-13 | Documented· 1 supported statement The regulator certificate listed the covered domain, licensee, number and active status. The Curaçao Gaming Control Board's bulk licence registry PDF is dated 2026-09-10. The registry PDF lists the same licence number and Medium Rare N.V., company number 145353. The registry PDF gives an issued date of 9 December 2025 and an expiry date of 9 June 2026. The registry PDF gives a different status: "Assessment in progress". RTP Ledger does not resolve this discrepancy between the two regulator-published sources. Checked 2026-09-13 |
| 03Country restrictions | Documented· 1 supported statement Terms clause 3.5 and the help centre's Restricted Regions article both name the same 25 territories as restricted. The first half is Aruba, Australia, Bonaire, Cuba, Curaçao, Cyprus, Gibraltar, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Malta, Myanmar and the Netherlands. The second half is Nicaragua, North Korea, Saba, Saint Maarten, Saint Martin, South Sudan, Statia, Syria, the United States, the United Kingdom, Yemen and Zimbabwe. Discrepancy: the research note that accompanied this list counted 23 territories. Recounting the same quoted list on 2026-09-12 gives 25. This claim record uses the counted figure of 25 and does not otherwise resolve the note. Checked 2026-09-12 | Documented· 1 supported statement The global terms enumerate 45 prohibited jurisdictions and prohibit VPN or proxy location manipulation; a named region is not silently expanded to an entire country. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 04Account journey and closure | Not checked· 0 supported statements Registration, verification stages, account currency and closure journey are not checked. No dated source | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement The public terms state the age condition and contractual registration step. Coverage gaps: observed verification journey, observed account-closure journey. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 05Payment catalogue | Documented· 1 supported statement The crypto deposit article and the withdrawal fees article both list the same 11 assets for deposits and withdrawals. They are BTC, ETH (also on the Base and Arbitrum networks), LTC, USDT, USDC, XRP, TRX, DOGE, SOL, SUI and BNB. The deposit article warns that an unsupported cryptocurrency sent to a Roobet address is lost and is not credited. Discrepancy: the deposit article and the withdrawal article disagree on which of these assets need 1 confirmation and which need 3. The withdrawal article groups LTC with the 1-confirmation assets: BTC, LTC, XRP, TRX, DOGE. The deposit article groups LTC with the 3-confirmation assets: ETH, LTC, USDT, USDC. This claim record states both groupings and does not resolve the conflict. Checked 2026-09-12 | Documented· 26 supported statements 9 payments.asset_withdrawal_table records cover BTC, DOGE, ETH, LTC, SOL, TRX, USDC, USDT, XRP. Each record follows the same documented pattern: BTC appears in Stake's public asset-level withdrawal table. The source does not bind the row to a specific network, so RTP Ledger does not treat it as an exact route claim. 17 payments.route_catalogue records cover BTC on Bitcoin, DOGE on Dogecoin, ETH on ERC-20, ETH on BEP-20, LTC on Litecoin, SOL on Solana, TRX on TRC-20, USDC on ERC-20, USDC on BEP-20, USDC on Polygon, USDC on Solana, USDT on ERC-20, USDT on BEP-20, USDT on Polygon, USDT on TRC-20, USDT on Solana, XRP on XRP Ledger. Each record follows the same documented pattern: BTC and Bitcoin appear together in Stake's accepted-networks table for deposits. RTP Ledger does not transfer asset-level withdrawal minimums or fees onto this route. Checked 2026-08-02 |
| 06Deposit terms | Documented· 1 supported statement The crypto deposit article states deposits are credited after 1 confirmation for BTC and XRP, or 3 confirmations for ETH, LTC, USDT and USDC. Confirmations are automatic, and there is no way to speed them up. The crypto withdrawal article separately states 1 confirmation for BTC, LTC, XRP, TRX and DOGE, or 3 confirmations for ETH, USDT and USDC. The two articles disagree specifically on LTC. Neither article, nor the terms, states a minimum deposit amount. Checked 2026-09-12 | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement RTP Ledger checked the public crypto withdrawal table, but it does not establish exact deposit-route terms. Deposit minimums, fees, confirmation requirements and crediting stages remain unknown. Coverage gaps: deposit.route_terms. Checked 2026-08-02 |
| 07Withdrawal terms | Partial evidence· 2 supported statements The crypto withdrawal article states a 100%-of-deposit wagering rule before a crypto withdrawal or tip is allowed. The withdrawal fees article states Roobet charges no withdrawal fee itself, only blockchain network fees, shown at the bottom of the withdrawal page. Terms clause 10.8 adds a 2% fee for each withdrawal beyond 10 within a rolling 30-day period. Terms clause 10.2 reserves the right to change the minimum withdrawal amount at any time. No fixed minimum figure is published on the pages checked. RTP Ledger has not observed a withdrawal on roobet.com, so processing time and effective fees are not established. Coverage gaps: first-party withdrawal processing observation. Checked 2026-09-12 | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement The public terms describe four material withdrawal conditions but do not provide an observed processing time. Coverage gaps: first-party withdrawal processing observation. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 08Bonus terms | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement The Rewards Explained article documents a 20% boost to Instant Rakeback for 72 hours through an affiliate code. The article does not state a deposit-match percentage, a wagering requirement, a maximum bonus amount or an expiry for a standing welcome offer. RTP Ledger records the offer as unverified until a page states the complete mechanics. Coverage gaps: bonus.economic_terms, bonus.account_eligibility_and_expiry. Checked 2026-09-12 | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement Stake publishes that a valid affiliate code entered within 24 hours unlocks rakeback equal to 3.5% of house edge. RTP Ledger does not infer a fixed deposit-match amount, wagering requirement or account-specific eligibility. Coverage gaps: bonus.account_eligibility_and_expiry. Checked 2026-08-02 |
| 09KYC and source-of-funds process | Partial evidence· 2 supported statements The Level 2 Verification article names the accepted documents: a passport, a driving licence, or a government-issued identification document. Terms clause 10.5 lets Roobet refuse withdrawals until identity is fully confirmed, and clause 4.9 lets Roobet request documents at any time. The KYC-AML-CFT policy states a general due-diligence practice at registration and during the ongoing relationship with the player. None of the pages checked states a withdrawal-amount threshold that triggers verification. RTP Ledger has not run a test account on roobet.com, so the stage at which verification is requested in practice is not established. Coverage gaps: observed KYC trigger and stage. Checked 2026-09-12 | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement Published records support possible withdrawal KYC and a detailed source-of-income document list, not the trigger timing for a specific account. Coverage gaps: observed KYC trigger and stage. Checked 2026-08-02 |
| 10Responsible-gambling controls | Documented· 2 supported statements The Gambling Limits help article offers wager, loss and deposit limits. The periods are daily (24 hours), weekly (7 days) and monthly (30 days). Up to 3 limits can be active at the same time. The responsible gambling page offers self-exclusion for a maximum of 5 years or permanently, after a mandatory 24-hour cooldown step from Casino, Sportsbook, or both. The same page links to GamCare and responsiblegambling.org for outside help. Checked 2026-09-12 | Documented· 2 supported statements The help centre publishes loss and wager limits plus a delay before an increase takes effect. The help centre publishes both indefinite self-exclusion and shorter break-in-play options. Checked 2026-08-02 |
| 11RTP Ledger cashout test | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement RTP Ledger has not withdrawn funds from a roobet.com test account, so cashout speed and fees are not observed. Coverage gaps: cashout.first_party_observation. No dated source | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement RTP Ledger has not registered a completed Stake cashout observation. Published withdrawal rules are not a substitute for a first-party cashout test. Coverage gaps: cashout.first_party_observation. No dated source |
| 12Complaint handling | Not checked· 0 supported statements Complaint handling and resolution outcomes are not checked in a dated source record. No dated source | Not checked· 0 supported statements Complaint handling and resolution outcomes are not checked in a dated source record. No dated source |
| 13Ownership and related brands | Not checked· 0 supported statements Parent, sister-brand and material operating relationships are not checked. No dated source | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement The terms call both payment-processing companies wholly owned subsidiaries. Coverage gaps: parent/legal-group relationship, related-brand relationship. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 14Game catalogue and RTP evidence | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement Neither the terms nor the Games help collection, including the House Games article, states an RTP, house-edge or provably-fair figure. Terms clause 15.11 mentions a random number generator only when it voids a bet made in error. That clause is not a fairness disclosure. A dedicated roobet.com/fairness page exists. A scripted fetch of that page returns only a client-rendered app shell, so its content could not be confirmed either way on the check day. Coverage gaps: game_rtp.stake_engine_catalogue_fields. Checked 2026-09-12 | Documented· 1 supported statement The public Stake Engine catalogue lists game, RTP and event-count records for each mode. RTP Ledger has no permanent archived copy of the catalogue. RTP Ledger does not infer account-specific availability from the catalogue. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 15Fairness and verification | Not checked· 0 supported statements Audit certificates and reproducible provably-fair implementations are not checked. No dated source | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement Stake publishes the algorithm and inputs for supported verifiable bets. Coverage gaps: reproduced account-bet verification. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 16Account and withdrawal security | Not checked· 0 supported statements Two-factor authentication (2FA), recovery and withdrawal-protection controls are not checked. No dated source | Partial evidence· 2 supported statements The help centre documents 2FA coverage and activation. The help centre documents an extra withdrawal authentication step for supported social logins. Coverage gaps: recovery and session controls. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 17Support and escalation | Partial evidence· 2 supported statements Terms Section 25 lists support@roobet.com for general questions and CS@roobet.com for complaints. The live-support help article states that live chat support is available 24/7 and can be opened from the account menu. RTP Ledger has not timed a support request on roobet.com, so response times are not established. Coverage gaps: timestamped support-response test. Checked 2026-09-12 | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement The terms publish the channels and stated availability, not observed response quality. Coverage gaps: timestamped support-response test. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 18Product and user experience | Not checked· 0 supported statements Product catalogue, devices and observed usability defects are not checked. No dated source | Not checked· 0 supported statements Product catalogue, devices and observed usability defects are not checked. No dated source |
| 19VIP and loyalty mechanics | Not checked· 0 supported statements VIP earning, tiers, expiry and withdrawal interactions are not checked. No dated source | Partial evidence· 1 supported statement The help centre names recurring promotion and loyalty mechanisms without proving account-specific value. Coverage gaps: effective VIP value and expiry. Checked 2026-08-01 |
| 20Privacy and data rights | Not checked· 0 supported statements Controller, collection, retention, transfers and deletion paths are not checked. No dated source | Partial evidence· 2 supported statements The policy covers the main data lifecycle but does not publish a fixed duration for every category. The help centre distinguishes account closure from complete deletion. Coverage gaps: category-level retention schedule. Checked 2026-08-01 |
What the research coverage shows
On 2026-09-27, Roobet has 9 areas with source support. Stake has 16. These totals measure current RTP Ledger research coverage. They do not measure casino safety or service quality.
Current cashout rows, derived live from each dossier:
- Roobet: partial evidence; 1 source-linked statement; 0 dated sources; no dated check.
- Stake: partial evidence; 1 source-linked statement; 0 dated sources; no dated check.
The comparison does not infer a completed account test from operator-published terms or from another evidence area.
For an asset/network view, use the Money Hub. For the complete publication rules, read the casino evidence methodology.
Optional operator links, after the evidence
The Roobet and Stake operator buttons are sponsored affiliate links. RTP Ledger may earn a commission from them. Commercial status does not change evidence status, research order, or publication rules. Verify current operator terms before you deposit.
rakebackPublisher-supplied campaign code. It does not confirm bonus eligibility or terms.
5savePublisher-supplied campaign code. It does not confirm bonus eligibility or terms.
18+. Gambling involves risk and is not a way to make money. Check local rules, set limits and never gamble money you cannot afford to lose. Get free support at BeGambleAware.org.