Weiss vs Roobet

Clause 7.6 of Weiss's terms allows it to request any documents and information needed to perform a KYC check at its discretion, for example in connection with a refund request. Its anti-money-laundering policy describes KYC programmes covering customer identification, verification and ongoing monitoring, and states no monetary threshold at which verification is triggered.

Roobet's clause 4.9 allows KYC documents to be requested at any time at its discretion and deposits and withdrawals to be limited until identification is complete; clause 10.5 refuses withdrawals until identity is fully verified. Neither operator publishes a figure, and neither commits to a moment. On this field the two are equivalent, and a reader should not expect a move between them to change anything.

Ongoing monitoring is the one phrase in Weiss's material that Roobet's clauses do not contain. It describes a continuing process rather than a single check, which is a slightly heavier commitment for the player than a one-off verification would be.

The comparison is short because one side of it is mostly blank. What Roobet publishes is a cashier of eleven coins, three numbered money clauses, and the identities of the companies behind the site.

A register link to the issuing board is a better reference than no link at all, and Weiss has one where Roobet does not. Roobet's OGL/2024/687/0427 was put to the Curacao certificate register on 2026-08-28 and returned nothing — but so did every other domain queried that day, including brands that certainly hold Curacao licences, so the non-result says nothing about Roobet's number in either direction.

Against that, Roobet names two companies and Weiss's record names none. Raw Entertainment B.V., registration 157205 at Korporaalweg 10 in Curacao, holds the licence. Raw Entertainment Ltd, registration HE421735 in Limassol, is named as the paying and operational agent — the entity money actually moves through, in a different jurisdiction from the licence holder. That is a substantial disclosure and it has no counterpart here.

Roobet's charges are also the only ones on either side: 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.