TrustDice vs Roobet
TrustDice publishes more about its games and its cashier than Roobet does, and less about the one rule that decides whether a balance leaves the site.
Written by Jordan Vela/Last checked:
Editor — reads operator documents and records what they say
TrustDice against Roobet, side by side
| TrustDice | Roobet | |
|---|---|---|
| Licence | Curaçao Gaming Authority | Government of Curaçao |
| Licence no. | OGL/2024/664/0280 | OGL/2024/687/0427 |
| Register status | Active | Not checked in the register |
| Providers | 43 | Not published |
| Coins | 9 | 11 |
| Stated KYC threshold | Not verified | Not published |
| Withdrawal cap | Not verified | Not published |
| Since | Not verified | Not published |
Source: roobet.com, 2026-08-28.
TrustDice is one of the 41 Roobet alternatives compared here, each on its own published records.
TrustDice is well documented on product and undocumented on process. It lists nine coins — BTC, ETH, EOS, USDT, USDC, LTC, DOGE, TRX and TXT — and names forty-three studios including Evolution, Pragmatic Play, Play'n GO, Playtech, NetEnt, Nolimit City, Push Gaming and Hacksaw. Its Curacao Gaming Authority licence, OGL/2024/664/0280, is recorded as active with a certificate link into the register.
What our record does not hold is a verification clause: no summary, no clause number, no document reference. That is a gap in our library rather than a finding about the operator, and it must not be read as a no-documents policy. Roobet's equivalent clauses are on the page: 4.9 for requests at any time and restrictions until identification completes, 10.5 for refusing withdrawals until identity is fully verified.
Product published, process unread
A comparison page is only as good as the worst-evidenced field in it, and here that field is verification. A player choosing TrustDice over Roobet on the basis of coins and studios is choosing on real evidence; a player choosing it in the belief that documents will never be requested is choosing on nothing at all.
Roobet's clauses are unfavourable and legible. They tell a reader that a request can arrive at any point, that deposits as well as withdrawals can be limited, and that no withdrawal completes until identity is fully verified. Nothing equivalent can be quoted on the other side.
Cashier and games compared
TrustDice's nine coins overlap heavily with Roobet's eleven. EOS and its own TXT token are the two entries Roobet does not carry; Roobet adds SOL, SUI, BNB and XRP. TXT is worth the same plain note as any operator-issued asset: a balance held in it carries exposure to the operator that issues it.
| Roobet | TrustDice | |
|---|---|---|
| Coins listed | 11 | 9 |
| On this list only | SOL, SUI, BNB, XRP | EOS, TXT |
| Studios named | None published | 43 |
| Verification clause | 4.9 and 10.5 | Not read |
| Licence status | Not stated | Active |
| Register link | None held | Certificate link into the Curacao register |
Roobet read 2026-08-28. TrustDice from our operator record, checked 2026-08-26.
Licence, limits and charges
TrustDice's certificate link goes into the Curacao Gaming Authority's own register and the status is recorded as active, which is a stronger reference than Roobet's, where our record carries no register link at all. Roobet's number returned no result when queried on 2026-08-28; nor did any other domain queried that day, so the non-result carries no weight in either direction.
Neither publishes a maximum withdrawal. Roobet's terms carry none, and no cap document has been read for TrustDice. Neither publishes a founding year. Roobet names two companies with registration numbers — Raw Entertainment B.V., reg. 157205 in Curacao, and Raw Entertainment Ltd, reg. HE421735 in Limassol — and our TrustDice record carries no corporate detail.
On costs Roobet is the only side with figures: 1% on all successful fiat deposits at clause 9.7, 2% from the tenth fiat withdrawal in a rolling thirty-day period at clause 10.8, and a requirement at clause 10.1 that a deposit be wagered before withdrawal. No fee schedule has been read for TrustDice, so it is unmeasured rather than cheaper.
Pros
- Forty-three studios named on the operator's own site, against no studio list at Roobet.
- Active Curacao certificate with a register link into the authority's own register.
- Lists EOS, which Roobet's cashier does not carry.
Cons
- No verification clause read at all, leaving the decisive question unanswered.
- Nine coins against Roobet's eleven, and one of the nine is the operator's own token.
- No fee schedule, withdrawal cap, founding year or operating company read.
Questions people ask
- Does TrustDice ask for identity documents?
We have not read a verification clause for it, so we cannot say. The blank in our record is not evidence that no clause exists and should not be read as a no-KYC policy.
- What does Roobet require?
Clause 4.9 allows documents at any time and permits deposits and withdrawals to be limited until identification is complete; clause 10.5 refuses withdrawals until identity is fully verified.
- How many studios does TrustDice name?
Forty-three on its own site, including Evolution, Pragmatic Play, Playtech and NetEnt. Roobet names none.
- Which coins are on TrustDice and not Roobet?
EOS and TXT, the second of which is the operator's own token. Roobet carries SOL, SUI, BNB and XRP that TrustDice's list does not.
- Which licence can be looked up?
TrustDice's. OGL/2024/664/0280 is recorded as active with a certificate link into the Curacao register; Roobet's number has no register link in our record.
TrustDice · alternatives to Roobet