Bookmakers to Avoid: the 20 lowest-scoring brands flagged
Bookmakers with Trust Score below 30 or an active red-flag override (OFAC, domain-risk scan, UKGC revocation, suspended, Spamhaus DROP), sorted ascending by overall score.
The 3 most severe by Trust Score
The lowest-scoring brands flagged by this criterion. Click any card for the full per-brand audit.
- #1Most severe20/100
1xBet
- Regulated by Secretaría de Gobernación (Mexico)
- 4 active licences
- Verified Jul 2026
1xBet scores 20 on Trust Score, with an active Curacao GCB licence, flagged for Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), red-flag override: Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), identity-check rigor 3 of 5.
See the full audit
- #22nd most severe20/100
Linebet
- Verified Jul 2026
Linebet scores 20 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, flagged for Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), red-flag override: Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), identity-check rigor 3 of 5.
See the full audit
- #33rd most severe20/100
Magicred
- Regulated by Malta Gaming Authority
- 1 active licence
- Verified Jul 2026
Magicred scores 20 on Trust Score, with an active Malta Gaming Authority licence, flagged for Third-party domain-risk scan critical (6/100), red-flag override: Third-party domain-risk scan critical (6/100), identity-check rigor 3 of 5.
See the full audit
The strip under each score is the brand's score DNA: licensing, corporate, security, reviews, threat intel and operations. Width is the model weight, colour is that component's score.
The rest of the ranking
Brands 4 through 20, grouped by rank band. Open a band to see the compact list.
Ranks 4 to 107 brandsOpen
| Rank | Bookmaker | Score | Key signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| #4 | Platincasino | 20/100 | Platincasino scores 20 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, flagged for Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), red-flag override: Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #5 | Spin Palace | 20/100 | Spin Palace scores 20 on Trust Score, with an active Alderney Gambling Control Commission licence, flagged for Third-party domain-risk scan critical (10/100), red-flag override: Third-party domain-risk scan critical (10/100), identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #6 | Spinbetter | 20/100 | Spinbetter scores 20 on Trust Score, with active licences from Kahnawake Gaming Commission and Anjouan AGA, flagged for Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), red-flag override: Third-party domain-risk scan critical (1/100), identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #7 | SeuBet | 24/100 | SeuBet scores 24 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, accepting players from 1 markets, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #8 | PixBet | 25/100 | PixBet scores 25 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, accepting players from 1 markets, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #9 | Betboo | 27/100 | Betboo scores 27 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, accepting players from 1 markets, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #10 | Winpot | 27/100 | Winpot scores 27 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
Ranks 11 to 2010 brandsOpen
| Rank | Bookmaker | Score | Key signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| #11 | Betnacional | 28/100 | Betnacional scores 28 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, accepting players from 1 markets, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #12 | Estrelabet | 28/100 | Estrelabet scores 28 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, accepting players from 1 markets, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #13 | OlimpoBet | 28/100 | OlimpoBet scores 28 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 4 of 5. |
| #14 | SupremaBet | 29/100 | SupremaBet scores 29 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, accepting players from 1 markets, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #15 | Zona de Jogo | 29/100 | Zona de Jogo scores 29 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, accepting players from 1 markets, low overall score with no offsetting Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #16 | Betwarrior | 36/100 | Betwarrior scores 36 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, flagged for 2 critical CVE(s) on IP, red-flag override: 2 critical CVE(s) on IP, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #17 | ivibet | 40/100 | Ivibet scores 40 on Trust Score, with an active Kahnawake Gaming Commission licence, flagged for 4 critical CVE(s) on IP, red-flag override: 4 critical CVE(s) on IP, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #18 | LuckLand | 40/100 | LuckLand scores 40 on Trust Score, with an active UK Gambling Commission licence, flagged for 1 critical CVE(s) on IP, red-flag override: 1 critical CVE(s) on IP, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #19 | Olybet | 40/100 | Olybet scores 40 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, flagged for 1 critical CVE(s) on IP, red-flag override: 1 critical CVE(s) on IP, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
| #20 | Thrillzz | 40/100 | Thrillzz scores 40 on Trust Score, with no Tier 1 or Tier 2 licence currently matched, flagged for 1 critical CVE(s) on IP, red-flag override: 1 critical CVE(s) on IP, identity-check rigor 3 of 5. |
Score colour: 80+ strong, 60-79 solid, 40-59 mixed, under 40 caution. Open any brand row for the full per-component breakdown.
Not seeing your brand? Atlas ranks brands from public regulator and operator sources. If a bookmaker you use is missing from this list or scored incorrectly, flag it for us and we will re-verify.
Explore the full ranking
Search all 20 brands in the Bookmakers to Avoid ranking, or raise the score bar to see which of them clear it. Each name links to its full brand audit.
Showing 20 of 20
- Criterion
- Trust Score below 30 OR active red-flag override
- Bookmakers ranked
- 20
- Last rebuilt
- 2026-07-21
What this list is
Bookmakers to Avoid is a curated subset of bookmakers that meet one specific criterion: trust score below 30 or active red-flag override. Bookmakers with Trust Score below 30 or an active red-flag override (OFAC, domain-risk scan, UKGC revocation, suspended, Spamhaus DROP), sorted ascending by overall score. Of the 1,806 bookmakers Atlas tracks, 20 qualify; the remaining 1,786 did not pass the criterion or scored below the cutoff.
"Best of" pages on the rest of the web are mostly affiliate-paid placements. This one is not. Every entry below is ranked by its independent Atlas Trust Score, with the criterion, the rejected count, and the trade-offs shown in the open.
How we ranked for “trust score below 30 or active red-flag override”
Each entry passes the criterion above and then ranks by Atlas Trust Score (0 to 100). The Trust Score combines six independent components: licensing strength, corporate transparency, security posture, public reputation, threat intelligence, and operational evidence.
Why these brands are flagged
Each of the 20 entries scored below 30 on Atlas Trust Score, or carries an active red-flag override (OFAC sanctions match, active enforcement action, or unresolved threat-intelligence signal). The flags are sourced from public regulator registers and open-source threat feeds.
What kept a brand off this list
A brand does not appear here if its Trust Score is 30 or above and it carries no active red-flag override. A brand can graduate off this list when its licence situation or enforcement record changes at the next monthly refresh.
What this list does not tell you
Absence from this list is not an endorsement. Many brands that are not on the avoid list still score poorly or have thin public records. Always read the full leaf-page audit before depositing with any operator.
Frequently asked questions
What lands a brand on the avoid list?
Two paths: a Trust Score below 30, or any red-flag override. Red flags include OFAC SDN match, a domain-risk scanner score below 10, recent UKGC revocation, suspended status, or Spamhaus DROP listing. Either path is enough to surface the brand here, regardless of marketing strength.
Can a brand recover from the avoid list?
Yes. Red flags are deterministic checks against live feeds. A delisting from PhishTank, a settled enforcement action, or a corrected Spamhaus listing will lift the cap on the next monthly research. We deliberately do not memo-ise red flags; the data is rebuilt from raw signals every run.
Why include brands with no licence at all?
A missing licence is a licensing-component score of zero, which contributes to a low overall score but is not on its own a red flag. Many brands here mix a sub-30 score with corporate opacity or threat-intel hits; the blurb on each entry calls out the dominant signal.
Atlas trust scores are researched monthly against public-source signals. See the scoring methodology or browse all curated lists.