Sportbet.one vs Roobet
Sportbet.one has the second-widest cashier in this comparison and the least conventional licence record, and its no-KYC claim sits on a homepage rather than in a term.
Written by Jordan Vela/Last checked:
Editor — reads operator documents and records what they say
Sportbet.one against Roobet, side by side
| Sportbet.one | Roobet | |
|---|---|---|
| Licence | M.I.S.A. | Government of Curaçao |
| Licence no. | G20190045 | OGL/2024/687/0427 |
| Register status | Not verified | Not checked in the register |
| Providers | Not verified | Not published |
| Coins | 19 | 11 |
| Stated KYC threshold | Not published | Not published |
| Withdrawal cap | Not verified | Not published |
| Since | 2018 | Not published |
Source: roobet.com, 2026-08-28.
Sportbet.one is one of the 41 Roobet alternatives compared here, each on its own published records.
Sportbet.one lists nineteen coins: BTC, USDT, ETH, LTC, VAULTA, SBET, SOL, USDC, BCH, DOGE, ADA, TON, XRP, BNB, DAI, TRX, SHIB, TRUMP and EOS. That is the second-widest published cashier among the brands compared here, behind Cloudbet's forty. Roobet lists eleven, all of which except SUI appear on Sportbet.one's list as well.
Two of the nineteen deserve a plain note rather than a recommendation: SBET appears to be the site's own token, and a balance held in an operator-issued asset carries exposure to that operator in a way a balance in BTC or USDT does not. Roobet issues nothing comparable in anything read.
The widest cashier here except one
Nineteen coins covers the mainstream assets, the two major stablecoins, DAI, and a tail of smaller tokens. For a player who already holds something outside the top ten this is a genuine advantage over Roobet, because it removes a conversion step, and conversion is where value quietly disappears.
| Roobet | Sportbet.one | |
|---|---|---|
| Coins listed | 11 | 19 |
| Only on Roobet's list | SUI | — |
| Year founded | Not published | 2018 |
| Licensing authority | Government of Curacao | M.I.S.A. |
| Register link | None held | Points at sportbet.one |
| Verification position | Clauses 4.9 and 10.5 | No-KYC claim, no clause |
Roobet from its cashier and terms, read 2026-08-28. Sportbet.one from our operator record, checked 2026-08-26.
A licence unlike the others in this set
Every other brand in this comparison holds either a Curacao number or an Anjouan one. Sportbet.one's record names M.I.S.A. and the number G20190045. That makes it the only entry of its kind here, and it means there is no comparable record in this library to set it against — a fact worth stating rather than skipping.
The register reference weakens it considerably. It points at sportbet.one itself rather than at any register maintained by an issuing body, so it is the operator confirming its own licence. This page treats that as no independent evidence at all. Roobet's Curacao number OGL/2024/687/0427 has no register link either, and did not resolve when queried on 2026-08-28 — as no domain queried that day did, which is why the result is treated as unresolved rather than adverse.
The verification claim, and where it lives
Sportbet.one states that it offers anonymous crypto betting with no KYC requirements. That statement comes from the site rather than from a numbered term, and our record holds no clause reference for it. A claim in that position is not enforceable in the way a term is, and a reader should weigh it accordingly.
Roobet's position is written into the contract and is far less appealing: clause 4.9 allows documents to be requested at any time at its discretion and deposits and withdrawals to be limited until identification is complete, and clause 10.5 refuses withdrawals until identity is fully verified. It is the worse offer, made in the place where offers count.
Neither publishes a maximum withdrawal, and neither names a game studio — Sportbet.one's roster has not been read and Roobet publishes none. Only Roobet publishes charges: 1% on fiat deposits at clause 9.7, 2% from the tenth fiat withdrawal in a rolling thirty days at clause 10.8, and a wagering requirement before withdrawal at clause 10.1.
Pros
- Nineteen coins listed, the second-widest published cashier in this comparison.
- Covers every coin on Roobet's list except SUI, plus DAI, TON, ADA, BCH, SHIB and EOS.
- Publishes a founding year of 2018; Roobet publishes none.
Cons
- The no-KYC claim appears on the site rather than in a numbered term, with no clause reference on our record.
- The register reference points at the operator's own domain, so it confirms nothing independently.
- One of the nineteen coins appears to be the operator's own token; no studio list or fee schedule read.
Questions people ask
- How many coins does Sportbet.one take?
Nineteen, including BTC, USDT, USDC, ETH, SOL, DAI, TON, ADA and EOS. Roobet lists eleven, of which only SUI is absent from Sportbet.one's list.
- Does it really require no verification?
It states that it offers anonymous crypto betting with no KYC requirements. That statement comes from the site rather than from a term, and our record holds no clause reference for it.
- What does Roobet require?
Clauses 4.9 and 10.5 allow documents to be requested at any time and refuse withdrawals until identity is fully verified. No amount is stated.
- Is the licence checkable?
Not from the reference we hold, which points at sportbet.one's own site rather than at a register kept by an issuing body. The authority named is M.I.S.A., the only such record in this comparison.
- Does either cap withdrawals?
Neither publishes a maximum withdrawal that we have read. Roobet's terms contain none, and no cap document has been read for Sportbet.one.
Sportbet.one · alternatives to Roobet