About this site

• The operator's cashier. Which settlement coins stand in it was counted there and not copied off the front page.
• The operator's terms. Verification clauses, ceilings and deadlines stand with a reference wherever one exists.
• The licence issuer's register. Number, status and operator, with the date on which the entry was read.

Search volumes, where they appear, come from Google's keyword data for Switzerland. Worked sums carry their assumption in the caption. Where nothing was read, the entry says «not read» and gives no estimate.

It has become usual to fit comparisons of this kind with an author profile: a photo, a first name, «twelve years in the industry». In most cases that person does not exist. So none stands here — neither an invented one nor a name meant to lend trust that the texts themselves have to earn.

In its place comes checkable provenance: beside every figure, where it comes from; beside every clause, the reference; beside every register entry, the reading date. That is less personal than a profile picture and markedly more useful, because it can be checked without believing anybody.

This comparison earns when somebody moves on from it to an operator. That is the financing, and it stands here because it explains the bias a site like this has structurally.

What is built in against it: the order is computed from five inputs rather than typed, the weights stand in full in the method, and every input can be checked on its own. Anyone arriving at different weights would get a different order — and could evidence that with the same numbers. There is no stronger safeguard against a site's own slant.

• Not a casino. It runs no cashier, holds no money and operates no game.
• Not advice — neither on investments nor on taxes nor on law.
• Not an arbitration body. It cannot settle a dispute with an operator.
• Not a measuring station for withdrawal times. Nobody here has timed one.

Contact and notices of errors are welcome: where a statement on this site is no longer right, that is a mistake and not a detail. Statements are corrected and the reading date is carried along, so that it stays visible how old an assertion is.

1. Open the cashier and count. The deposit drop-down, not the front page. The tickers and the date are written down.
2. Search the terms for the verification clause. The wording is written down with its reference, not a summary of it.
3. Look up the register number with the issuer. Number, status, operator and the reading date are written down.
4. Compute. From those statements the score follows by the weights that stand in the method — with no intermediate step in which somebody adjusts something.

The fourth step is what separates this comparison from most. The order arises out of the three steps before it and is not sorted afterwards. That has an uncomfortable side effect: if a cashier this site sends people to does worse on the inputs, it slips down — and this site earns less. Which is exactly why the calculation stands out in the open.

Where a statement is no longer right, it is corrected and the reading date is set anew. What does not happen: a statement is not removed because an operator dislikes it, and no score is moved by hand. Either would make the calculation worthless, and with it the only reason to follow this comparison at all.

Two things are expressly welcome: notice of a cashier that has changed, and notice of a clause whose reference has moved. Both cost one reader's time and save everyone else a wrong statement.

This page as of 25. September 2026. Changes to cashiers, terms and register entries are the normal case, not the exception.