About iGaming Payment Solutions

Independent iGaming payment provider reviews

Why This Site Exists

If you've ever tried to compare payment providers for an online gambling operation, you already know the problem. Most "review" sites fall into two categories: affiliate pages that rank by commission rate, or provider marketing repackaged as independent analysis. Neither gives you what you actually need.

Operators processing six- and seven-figure monthly volumes were making PSP decisions based on sales calls, conference conversations, and whatever compliance could piece together from scattered documentation. There was no single resource that pulled together pricing, rolling reserves, settlement windows, platform integrations, and licensing coverage in a way that let you actually compare.

So we made one.

20

Providers reviewed

6

Scoring dimensions

Malta-based

Independent · Data-driven

What We Do

We maintain in-depth reviews of 20 payment providers that serve the iGaming industry. Each review scores the provider across six weighted dimensions using a transparent methodology we publish in full.

Beyond individual reviews, we publish comparison analyses, category rankings (best for LatAm, best for crypto, cheapest for small operators), and educational content about iGaming payment processing. Everything is built on verifiable data: provider documentation, regulatory registries, public review platforms, and our own market analysis.

Malta HQ

We chose Malta because it's where the European iGaming industry lives. When your office is ten minutes from the MGA and half your lunch meetings are with payment and platform people, staying current isn't research. It's Tuesday.

iGaming Payment Solutions Ltd, Malta

Who We Are

Team Background

Our team comes from iGaming operations, payment technology, and financial compliance. We've sat on the operator side of the table: evaluating PSP proposals, negotiating rolling reserve terms, dealing with settlement delays, and figuring out which provider actually delivers on what their sales deck promises.

iGaming Payment Solutions grew out of the spreadsheets and comparison docs we were already building for ourselves.

No Bylines

We publish under the iGaming Payment Solutions brand rather than individual names. The methodology and data should speak louder than personal credentials.

If the analysis is wrong, knowing who wrote it doesn't make it right. If the analysis is solid, it doesn't matter who did.

Transparency

How We Make Money

Some provider links on our site are affiliate links, meaning we receive a commission if you sign up through them. Affiliate relationships are always disclosed on each review page where they exist.

Our scoring does not change based on whether we have an affiliate relationship. Providers cannot pay for higher scores, and we review providers we have no commercial relationship with at all. Several of our highest-scored providers have no affiliate arrangement with us, and several of our lowest-scored do.

We don't accept payment for score manipulation, we don't give providers pre-publication editorial review, and we don't suppress negative findings. If a provider scores 4.2/10, that's what we publish.

Scores ≠ Revenue

No pay-for-rank. No pre-publication review. No suppressed findings.

Not an integration partner

We don't help you build the technical connection to any provider. We help you decide which provider to connect to.

Not a regulator

Our compliance scoring reflects publicly available licensing data. It is not legal advice. Your compliance team should verify claims before signing.

Not exhaustive

We cover 20 providers. If one isn't in our database, it doesn't mean they're bad. We prioritize by operator demand and market share.

Not infallible

Providers change constantly. We verify quarterly, but if you spot an error, tell us. We'd rather correct it than let bad data influence decisions.

Our Editorial Standards

Every review follows the same process. We collect baseline data from official provider sources. We verify licensing claims against regulator registries (MGA, FCA, UKGC). We analyze pricing and calculate Total Cost of Ownership estimates. We evaluate technology through documentation review and integration timeline data. We pull and contextualize public user reviews. And we apply our scoring framework consistently across all providers.

If a provider contacts us to dispute a factual claim, we investigate. If they're right, we correct the review and note the correction. If they disagree with our scoring methodology, we explain our reasoning and leave the score as-is. Opinions informed by data are what we're here to provide.

Get in Touch

General inquiries

sup@igamingpaymentsolutions.com

Corrections & updates

sup@igamingpaymentsolutions.com

Provider submissions

Inclusion is based on relevance to operators, not payment. We evaluate everyone the same way.