TÄRING RATING METHODOLOGY
How is the TÄRING rating calculated?
The rating is neither a marketing number nor a gut feeling. It shows how much real value an offer may provide for an ordinary user, taking account of the risk to their own money, the conditions and restrictions on using the reward.
On many comparison sites, the basis of a rating remains unclear to the reader. A TÄRING rating must rely on checked conditions, a methodology that applies to all offers and, where necessary, a clearly disclosed assumption.
A good rating comes from substantial, realistic value, not just a large headline figure.
WHY DOES IT MATTER?
One number backed by real conditions
The advertised maximum does not tell you whether an offer is good. A high rating requires a valuable reward, a realistic chance of obtaining it and reasonable conditions.
We compare real value
We consider what the user can realistically receive and how much they must stake, play or risk to get it.
The bigger number does not always win
A large prize pool or possible top prize does not automatically mean substantial value for an individual player.
We do not invent missing information
If an important condition is missing or contradictory, we prefer to leave the offer unrated rather than display a misleading number.
FIVE RATED COMPONENTS
Every offer is examined through five questions
The two most heavily weighted components are the reward’s value and its actual attainability.
Reward value
How large and realistic is one user’s reward compared with the required playing volume or other commitment?
Ease of qualifying
How much of your own money, how many steps and how much time are needed, and does the offer require separate activation?
Reward attainability
How realistically can an ordinary user who takes part correctly meet the requirements and actually receive the reward?
Flexibility
How much choice is there in games, stakes, timing, repeat participation and how you take part?
Freedom to use the reward
How freely can an earned reward be used or withdrawn, and which restrictions apply after it is received?
THE CALCULATION
How do five components form the starting rating?
Each component receives 0–100 points. We multiply the points by the component’s weight and add them to form the weighted starting rating. We then check whether important offer restrictions impose a cap on the result.
The starting rating is not always the final rating
The five component scores form the weighted starting rating. The final rating may be lower when wagering, a winnings limit or another important restriction imposes a cap. For an offer with several reward parts, each part is rated and capped separately, then the results are combined according to their estimated face values.
- 1Weighted starting ratingThe weighted sum of the five component scores.
- 2Rating capsWe check wagering, winnings limits and other important restrictions.
- 3Combining reward partsWe combine separately rated parts according to their estimated face values.
- 4Final ratingWe round the result only after all stages are complete.
We check the conditions
We rate only what official sources and the registry’s evidence confirm.
We establish the real relationship
We compare the reward with the required wagering volume and risk. A deposit is a condition of participation, not automatically a cost or a loss.
We apply safeguards
Very strict wagering, a low withdrawal cap or opaque chance must not receive an unjustifiably high rating.
We check that the same restriction is not counted twice
For example, one wagering requirement is not penalised in several components without a reason.
Different rewards, different restrictions
We assess the value of a cash bonus and free spins separately. A strict condition on one part affects the other only when earning or withdrawing them is linked.
We compare the full choice
If a tier is freely selectable, the main rating may be based on the most favourable tier. Its deposit, bonus and wagering requirement must belong to the same option.
A guaranteed reward is not a prize draw
A guaranteed reward of a random size differs from a draw in which you may win nothing. We do not treat a maximum prize with an unknown probability as certain value.
THREE DIFFERENT THINGS
The same amount does not mean the same value
A deposit, wagering volume and bonus might each be 100 €, but their effect on the player differs.
100 € deposit
Transferring money to a gaming account is a participation and liquidity requirement. It is not automatically a 100 € cost or loss.
100 € wagering volume
This is the total amount staked, not a guaranteed cost or loss of the same size. We assess the reward-to-volume relationship and separately account for actual money at risk, time and other restrictions. When there is no reliable basis for expected loss, we do not equate it with the full turnover.
100 € bonus
This is face value. Actual value may be reduced by wagering requirements, a winnings cap, restrictions on eligible games and the time available to use it.
POINT SCALE
What does the rating mean?
A high rating indicates a more favourable balance of value and conditions. It does not guarantee a win or mean that gambling is risk-free.
REAL EXAMPLES
The same formula, three very different offers
These examples come from the methodology 0.4.1 review and describe the conditions at that time. They are not a promise about the offer’s current rating or validity.
OLYBET · OLYPICKS
Free prediction game
Taking part requires no money of your own, games recur and the rules are clear. The rating is limited by the need to get at least five of six predictions right to earn a reward.
84,9 → 85
OLYBET · WIN A CORVETTE!
Prize draw with a large top prize
The car gives the draw a high possible value, but one ticket requires 400 € in turnover and the probability of winning has not been published. A large top prize alone does not make an offer very strong.
49,0 → 49
PAF · 50% DEPOSIT BONUS
Up to 25 € bonus
A deposit receives up to 25 € in bonus money, but the bonus must be wagered 45 times to turn it into cash. The strict requirement significantly reduces the reward’s actual attainability.
31,9 → 32
METHODOLOGY VERSIONS
Each rating remains linked to the rules used
The version shown beside an offer’s rating identifies the weights and refinements used to calculate it. An older rating is neither presented as a result of the newer methodology nor silently changed.
The component weights were 25% · 20% · 25% · 10% · 20%. Some earlier assessments use this version.
The component weights changed to 30% · 20% · 30% · 10% · 10%, and consistently applied rating caps were added to the calculation.
The weights stayed the same. This refinement treats reward parts separately and accounts more precisely for mixed packages, selectable tiers and time limits. For turnover-based requirements, we distinguish wagering volume from guaranteed cost and do not penalise the same restriction across several components without justification.
0.4.3
Rating with a limited assumption
If a missing reward value does not prevent an understanding of the offer’s main mechanism, we may publish a separately labelled estimated rating. We compare justified lower and higher scenarios. Both must stay in the same rating band and differ by no more than 5 points; we publish the conservative scenario with low confidence.
An assumption does not become an operator-confirmed term. The explanation shows the values used and whether the range is evidenced or only an editorial scenario. In the latter case, the actual value may also fall outside the range. The face value of spins is not guaranteed cash winnings. If there is no meaningful basis for selecting scenarios or their results differ materially, the offer remains unrated.
0.4.3 introduces transparent assumption-based ratings. Weights and rating caps are unchanged. These ratings are excluded from operator campaign averages; earlier ratings are not automatically recalculated.
THE METHODOLOGY EVOLVES
The same principle, an increasingly precise system
The methodology is not set in stone. If we find a recurring error or a better way to measure value, we update the rules, test their effect and identify a new version. We do not add a hidden exception for a single promotion.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Useful facts about the rating
Does a high rating mean a guaranteed win?
No. The rating compares the offer’s value and conditions, but does not make gambling outcomes predictable or remove financial risk.
Why is the final rating not always equal to the weighted component sum?
The weighted component sum is the starting rating. Very strict wagering, a low winnings limit or another important restriction may cap the final rating. For offers with several reward parts, we calculate each part separately and combine them according to their estimated face values.
Why are some offers unrated?
We leave an offer unrated when its core value cannot be assessed reliably. One missing minor detail does not automatically make an otherwise clear offer unrateable.
Does the largest prize pool automatically earn a high rating?
No. The total pool may be shared among many players or depend on a very small chance of winning. We assess realistic value for an ordinary user.
Does an affiliate relationship affect the rating?
No. The rating follows the offer’s checked conditions and the same methodology, regardless of whether TÄRING has an affiliate relationship with the operator.
Why might an offer’s rating change later?
The operator may change its conditions, or we may refine the methodology. We reassess the rating when important new information becomes available.