This post is also available in:
Understanding customer support quality and responsible gambling tools’ availability is crucial for online casinos.
While iGaming operators have acquired more credibility due to regulatory updates, gaming fans care mostly about a seamless and customer-centric experience.
This study aims to comprehensively assess the accessibility, responsiveness, and effectiveness of customer support services, plus their ethical approach to Responsible Gambling (RG), considering tools and initiatives.
We evaluate these aspects across ten selected brands, providing insights into their performance and areas for improvement.
Methodology of the Study
Similar to our first test, we combined quantitative and qualitative data to analyze the performance of selected casino operators – now expanding our evaluation to ten online casino brands.
The following brands were chosen based on the Share of Voice (SOV) report (subject to change each quarter):
- Betano
- Betfair
- KTO
- bet365
- Betway
- Pokerstars
- Parimatch
- Esportes da Sorte
- Sportingbet
- Pixbet
Briefly, this is how our methodology works:
- We contacted online casino and sports betting operators several times at different times of the day, over two weeks;
- We analyzed their general support structure, such as channels available, registration and login, FAQs, YouTube video tutorials, and support automation (chatbots)
- We asked several questions on the topics of Payments, Bonuses, Responsible Gambling (RG), Scams, Legality, Miscellaneous, and Account.
- Quantitatively, we assessed the speed of the chatbot and agent’s answer (how long we had to wait to get a response);
- Qualitatively, we assessed the effectiveness of the answers (including the responding agent ethics, particularly on RG issues), as well as the UX during the exchange (live chat interface, user-friendliness of related features, and operational flow)
- Finally, we rated the performances of each casino, from 1 (bad) to 5 (excellent) on each topic and the overall CS rating.
What Are the Evaluation Parameters?
The assessment was based on the following criteria:
| Criteria | Details |
|---|---|
| Ease of Access | Links accessibility; Login requirements; YouTube channel |
| Depth of FAQs | Total of questions on FAQ section; FAQ category breakdown |
| Support Details in FAQs | Availability of Casino and Sports terminology |
| Ease of Finding Live Chat | Time to find; Page location; Logged out accessibility; Ratings (1-5) |
| Customer Support Availability and Channels | CS Opening hours; Live chat, Email, Phone, WhatsApp, Telegram, |
| CS Automation: AI vs Human | Chatbot interaction; Transition to human support; Chatbot quality |
| CS Response Time | Live chat and Email response times; Problem Resolution Rating (1-5) |
| Reclame Aqui Scores | Average Customer Rating; Most Common Complaints; % of Complaints responded to; Reputation; Score |
| Responsible Gambling Tools | Availability of Deposit limits, Bet limits, Loss limits, Session limits, Self-exclusion, Player history, Time alerts, Self-assessment test |
| Responsible Gambling Initiatives | Gamecare, Gambling Therapy, Responsible Gambling, IBJR, others |
| Responsible Gambling Test | Perform RG tests via live chat when logged out; assess responses: Effective |
This approach enabled us to establish clear KPIs to assess key factors like speed, quality, efficiency, timeliness, and all-around performance over several distinct CS scenarios.
Next, we analyze how each brand performed in these metrics more closely on our test.
How Easy Was to Access Support Links on the Top 10 Casino Brands?
The ease of accessing support information – such as links and FAQs – is a great part of a seamless customer experience.
We analyzed the ease of accessing support links and FAQs on the top 10 online casino brands for different pages (index, casino, slots…); if login was required to access such links; if they had a YouTube channel with helpful information; and if they had casino/sports terminology available.
As we can see, there is a mixed level of support and user guidance across the top 10 online casino brands.
KTO stands out by offering easy access to support links, with no login required to access support information or game pages. Although Parimatch and Sportingbet support links are easy to navigate, they require login to access specific game pages.
Bet365, PokerStars, and Pixbet provide a regular level of accessibility – also requiring a login for specific game pages.
Betano, Betfair, Betway, and Esportes da Sorte are hard to navigate, and finding the support links could be more user-friendly.
On the other hand, support links are consistently available from the index page across all brands. At the same time, YouTube channels with relevant content are available for Betway, and PokerStars, and with limited content for Betano and Betfair.
Casino and Sports terminology coverage varies significantly, with only KTO, Bet365, and Pixbet offering comprehensive details, whereas Betano, Betfair, Betway (focused on sports), and Sportingbet provide partial information.
How In-Depth Are the FAQs?
Another important variable to assess the easiness of accessing support links is the depth of the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).
That is because a more thorough FAQ can improve the player experience and answer questions in a direct and self-service way. Below, we analyze the FAQ of the top ten casino brands.
Betfair
Betfair offers 80 FAQ questions distributed across various topics, though they can be challenging to locate.
They also offer 4 questions on Casino, 27 on Sports, 11 on Payments, and 10 on Registration.
These FAQs are hard to find and lack detailed Casino and Sports terminology, limiting their utility.
Betano
Betano’s FAQs are accessible through their Help Center Page. They offer 21 questions on the casino page and 4 on the sports page, with some overlap. There are 16 questions about payments and 13 about account registration.
Support details have partial inclusion of casino and sports terminology, though not detailed enough for unfamiliar users, which could confuse their understanding.
KTO
KTO’s FAQs provide varying levels of depth and coverage across different sections of their website.
There are 20 general FAQs, plus 8 on Casino, covering essential topics like gameplay instructions and safety measures; 3 on Payments, detailing deposit options; and 10 on Registration, addressing personal data security and account access.
Additionally, there are both casino and sports terminologies, providing comprehensive definitions and explanations relevant to users’ gaming experiences.
Bet365
Bet365 offers a comprehensive FAQ section with 195 questions, among others: 12 for Casino, 100 for Sports, 8 for Payments, and 6 for Registration. Support details and terminology for both casino and sports are integrated within the FAQs, facilitating user access to information.
Betway
Betway offers a moderate depth of FAQs, primarily accessible through the “Contact Us” page. The platform covers various questions regarding payment methods, deposits, and withdrawals, and registration FAQs include detailed answers regarding account registration and verification processes.
While Betway does not include casino terminology, it is focused on sports terminology. The support details are included in the FAQs, along with some casino, but not sports terminology.
PokerStars
PokerStars features a comprehensive FAQ section with a total of 491 questions, with 27 for Casino, 33 for Sports, 65 for payment-related topics, and 47 for registration issues.
However, PokerStars’ FAQs lack specific support details and terminology for both casinos and sports, which may affect users’ experience with it.
Parimatch
Parimatch provides a total of 88 FAQs, with 4 questions dedicated to the casino section, 4 for payment topics, and 10 for registration.
The platform includes support details, but not specific terminology for casinos or sports.
Esportes da Sorte
Esportes da Sorte offers more than 100 questions on their FAQs, addressing various aspects of casino gaming (17), sports betting (15), payments (10), and account registration/management (25).
However, there are some translation issues in the FAQ section, which negatively impact players’ user experience while reading through it.
Sportingbet
Sportingbet provides 85 questions in their FAQs, with 7 questions for casinos, 8 for sports, 20 for payments, and 10 for account registration.
However, sports-related FAQs are limited, covering only basic betting rules, which are not directly accessible from the sports page.
There is also limited sports and casino terminology available, with no very detailed information for curious users.
Pixbet
Pixbet does not offer a specific FAQ section. On the other hand, they have several sections within the support page, covering betting information, responsible gambling, KYC politics, an exclusive support channel for compulsive gamblers, and more.
The “Gambling Rules” section covers a wide variety of sports betting terminology (for real and virtual sports games), but none for casinos, which may fall short for users seeking comprehensive casino guidance.
How Easy Was To Find the Live Chat Option?
When the FAQ only is not enough, customers will need active support – usually through a live chat channel.
The graph below shows how long it took to find the live chat option on each online casino website (in minutes/seconds):
We can see that Betway live chat was the hardest to locate, with an average of 5.77 minutes, followed by Sportingbet with 4 minutes.
Esportes da Sorte and bet365 were the fastest ones, with an average of only 1.02 minutes and 1.53 minutes, respectively. Parimatch, Pixbet, KTO, and Betano presented good performances as well, with an overall average of 2 minutes.
This shows that some brands need to make their interface more user-friendly to improve the player experience with their live chat support.
Overall, this is how we rated the ease of locating the live chat option in each brand, with 1 being the hardest and 5 the easiest.
Overall, the online casinos regularly performed on the ease of finding the live chat, with a shoutout to Esportes da Sorte, Parimatch, Pixbet, and bet365.
Betway and Sportingbet, on the other hand, need to improve the location of their live chat button to facilitate the player experience with it.
In all online casinos, we could access the live chat being logged out, which secures anonymity to the players if they prefer it.
Customer Support Channels – Availability and Opening Hours
A seamless customer support experience in online casinos involves the time and channels available, so players can request help when they need it.
Regarding the channels available, Live Chat is present in all the brands, with some of them having other support channels.
Betano, KTO, Betway, Parimatch, Esportes da Sorte, and Sportingbet have Email support; only Betano has Phone support; Parimatch and Pixbet have Telegram support; and Sportingbet has Instagram support.
Below, we can see the opening hours of live chat and email support:
| Brands | Live Chat Opening Hours | Email Opening Hours |
|---|---|---|
| Betfair | 10 AM to 10 PM BRT, every day | Not Available |
| Betano | 24/7 | 24/7 |
| KTO | 9 AM to 12 AM BRT, every day | 24/7 |
| bet365 | 24/7 | Not Available |
| Betway | 8 AM to 8 PM BRT, every day | 24/7 |
| Pokerstars | 24/7 | Not Available |
| Parimatch | 24/7 | 24/7 |
| Esportes da Sorte | 24/7 | 24/7 |
| Sportingbet | 24/7 | 24/7 |
| Pixbet | 24/7 | 24/7 |
Most brands offer 24/7 support, but it is interesting to observe the consistency of their support throughout the day; busy times or late hours can increase the difficulty of getting support.
But before reaching the actual human support, we usually interact with the chatbots (when they are available). That is why we also evaluated the performance of the support automation of the online casinos, detailed next.
CS Automation: AI vs Human Support
To assess the performance of the support automation of the top ten online casinos, we analyzed three key elements:
- If we were directed to a chatbot
- How easy was it to get human support – rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (where 1 is bad and 5 is excellent)
- How in-depth the chatbot responses were – rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning it didn’t help at all and 5 meaning it was very helpful)
This is the performance of the online casino chatbots:
Betfair’s chatbot is well structured with several pre-programmed options – but it quickly redirected us to a human attendant. Interestingly enough, we didn’t necessarily have to address the options chosen in the bot with the human agent. The transfer time from the bot to a human varied between an instant and 2 minutes, which is why the average rate is 3.8 for ease of accessing human support.
For payment-related inquiries, the bot initially provided good options, which lacked in the categories of bonus, scams, legality, and miscellaneous. For Responsible Gambling and account-related issues, the system is very effective in transferring users to a live representative, so the average rating for it is 3.1.
KTO’s chatbot provided a good list of questions, plus “help with other subjects” to widen the user options, so it had the highest score, 4.2, on the depth of chatbot responses.
It also gave good responses, FAQ article recommendations, and by responding you ‘didn’t get all the help’ and selecting an option to get the human support. The transfer time from the bot to a human was long (between 8 and 25 minutes), which explains the average rate of 3 on human support easiness.
Bet365’s chatbot provides varying levels of support depending on the category, with predefined questions. The bot provides informative and complete answers, especially in account-related queries, but it takes too long to respond and redirect to human support.
The bot lacks more in-depth options for payment and bonus queries. For Responsible Gambling scams, legality, and miscellaneous categories, the bot doesn’t provide options but immediately transfers users to an attendant.
Betway’s chatbot is poorly developed and presented several technical issues during our test. One was the translation error, with answers coming partially in Portuguese, and partially in English. Another was that the bot crashed when we tried to get redirected to an agent.
Pokerstars’s chatbot is very limited since the redirection to a human attendant was quick. The bot was able to provide basic answers to a few questions on the main categories – account, payments, and bonus.
Parimatch’s chatbot provided basic options on registration and account since it redirected us to a human straight away. Although Its answers to the main categories were basic and straightforward, it always redirected us to human support, which was fast and easy to reach.
Esportes da Sorte’s chatbot is not well designed. It repeats the process of asking for personal details previously provided for every new question asked. However, it redirects to human support once selecting the option “didn’t get all the help”
Sportingbet’s chatbot is complete and provides a wide range of question options besides the main ones, such as “problems with my balance” and “sporting betting”. On the other hand, there are no pre-set options for Responsible Gambling, scams, legality, and miscellaneous categories, which require human assistance. Also, we ended up having to answer several questions from the bot to gain access to a human attendant, which took a while.
Betano and Pixbet don’t have chatbots, so we could online rate the human support easiness for them – 4.2 and 4, respectively.
Support Speed – How Fast Are the Online Casino Channels?
What first stands out in a customer support experience is the Speed of their answer – another pillar in a seamless customer experience.
We evaluated the fastest and the slowest response times of each brand for both live chat and email support. We categorized the response time in Fast, Regular, and Slow, based on the casino’s performance.
For live chat, the fastest response time was under a minute, for five brands: Betway, Parimatch, Sportingbet, and Pixbet.
KTO, Betfair, and bet365 also performed consistently, with a 2-minute answer – which is also rated as fast in live chat support. Pokerstars’ response time was slightly higher, with 3 minutes.
Regarding the slowest chat response time, we got Betway with 28 minutes, and KTO, with 25 minutes. The other brands performed regularly.
Betway and Sportingbet had a regular response time of 7 minutes, and the other brands performed consistently from 5 minutes and under.
For email support, KTO had the fastest response time: 5 minutes, and was rated with a Fast response time overall.
Betano also performed well, with 5 minutes as its fastest response, followed by Esportes da Sorte (10 minutes) and Parimatch (23 minutes). Pokerstars, Betway, Pixbet, and Sportingbet performed within the regular timeframe.
Regarding the slowest email response, we have Pokerstars, with 72 hours.
KTO and Betano performed within their regular timeframe – with fast responses for the email support expected pattern.
Betway, Parimatch, Esportes da Sorte, Sportingbet, and Pixbet, however, didn’t reply to our email queries.
Next, we assess how efficient the online casino supports were in addressing and solving our issues.
Efficiency – Did the Online Casinos’ Support Resolve Our Queries?
Regarding Efficiency, the top 10 Brazilian online casinos also presented varying results, showing a mixed level of support effectiveness in solving players’ issues.
We assessed and rated the efficiency of the brand’s support in seven categories: Payments, Bonus, Responsible Gambling, Scams, Legality, Miscellaneous, and Account. We asked them various questions to help us evaluate their effectiveness and professionalism. Then, we calculated their overall problem-resolution rate.
Below, we can see how each brand performed, and the main impressions of the support experience with each.
We can see that the ratings of the online casino’s customer support depend somewhat on the topic addressed.
These ratings don’t consider response time, but the suitability and impact of the suggested solution, as well as the attitude of the agent towards the problem posed.
Therefore, interaction assessments were interpreted as qualitative data based on how thoughtful and effective the approaches were.
Betfair
Betfair had a good performance in all categories, with the highest score on Miscellaneous (4.75), and 4.1 in general.
Despite the good rating, the answers were mixed between very helpful, with thoughtful attitudes, and disinterested and confused – showing room for improvement.
Betano
Betano had a good performance, with strong rates in the Account category (4.8), and ratings above 4 in almost all categories – except on Responsible Gambling (RG), which cost its final rating of 4.3.
Overall, the answers were clear, and straightforward and showed a helping and good attitude toward our doubts, often providing extra support links and solutions. However, it lacked the willingness to answer questions about the Legality of games and clarity on the subject.
KTO
KTO had the best performance in problem resolution among all brands, with the highest scores in RG (4.4), Legality (4.6), and Miscellaneous (4.8), and the highest final rate of 4.4.
Their support was clear, helpful, and very informative in general, showing a commitment to a good player experience. However, it can improve its tact and depth in answers to safety and bonus issues.
Bet365
Bet365 had a good performance overall, with the highest scores in Bonus (4.6), and a final rating of 4.
Betway
Betway had the worst performance, with the lowest rates in every category, and a final score of 2.2.
The general feeling is that the questions weren’t properly answered, showing a massive need for more commitment to the player experience.
Pokerstars
Pokerstars also had a bad performance – especially in the Payments and Scams categories – and a general rating of 2.7, also showcasing the need for improvement in its customer support.
Parimatch
Parimatch had a regular performance in all categories, with a slight improvement in the Miscellaneous rate (4.4), with an average of 3.7.
The answers in general were vague and lacked more clarity and tact from the attendants – especially on topics players might not be familiar with, like data safety and games’ legality.
Esportes da Sorte
Esportes da Sorte’s performance was regular; although it had good ratings on Payments and RG, its final score of 3.8 reflected its medium customer support quality.
The responses weren’t very thoughtful or detailed, with very simple answers on matters that need more explanation and support.
Sportingbet
Sportingbet also had a good performance in the effectiveness test, with strong scores above 4 in all categories, and a final score of 4.2.
The responses were straightforward and committed to the player, often shown by the provision of additional support links. However, some of them were generic, leaving room for improvement.
Pixbet
Pixbet had a good performance, with strong rates in almost all categories, and a final score of 4.
The answers were straightforward and informative, showing a good level of interest from the attendants. However, there were setbacks in giving further explanations to simple questions, which could be improved with a more thoughtful approach.
This assessment is a crucial part of how the players evaluate their experience in the online casinos, and how they perceive their speed, efficiency, and ethics.
Next, we will see how these brands are rated by the players in an external customer experience tool, Reclame Aqui.
How the Top 10 Online Casinos Are Rated in Reclame Aqui?
Reclame Aqui is a popular website in Brazil for customer experience evaluation.
We can see the companies’ reputation and score, comments (from customers and the companies), and whether the customers would do business again with the companies evaluated. Below, we can see our top 10 online casinos and their performance on the website in the last six months.
Betano and Sportingbet excel in their evaluation, with high response percentages and great scores (8.4 and 8.3, respectively).
Esportes da Sorte and Pixbet also have strong performances and good reputations.
KTO is rated as regular, however with a good score of 6.5, and it is the only brand that has answered 100% of players’ complaints, showing commitment to the player experience.
Betfair is rated as bad, with a massive number of negative comments from players on its experience.
Betway, bet365, Pokerstars, and Parimatch don’t even have a score, because they haven’t answered none (or only a few) of the complaints.
This complementary data is an extension of the customer experience and support of the brands and dictates its reputation among Brazilian players.
Overall, it shows that half of the brands need to improve their external sources of support – since Reclame Aqui is a key measure of trust, safety, and loyalty-building among Brazilian consumers.
Responsible Gambling Assessment – How Are The Top 10 Brands Committed to Players’ Well-Being?
An online gambling support channel’s approach to responsible gaming is a testament to the company’s commitment to player well-being. We tested the CS staff’s knowledge in this critical area, as well as their empathy toward player concerns.
We assessed three different metrics:
- Which RG tools do the top 10 online casinos have (e.g. self-exclusion, session limits, etc)?
- Which RG initiatives do they participate in (e.g. Gambling Therapy, Gamecare)?
- How was the support approach in terms of empathy toward our concerns?
We evaluated these for every brand and saw how they performed.
What Tools and Initiatives the Online Casinos Have?
Among the analyzed online casinos, we saw a similar availability of tools:
As we can see in the table, deposit limits, self-exclusion, and player history are (almost) unanimous among the online casinos – only Parimatch doesn’t have the deposit limit tools.
Self-assessment test and loss limits, on the other hand, are the tools with less adherence among the casinos, showing a need to widen their RG tools to deal with at-risk players, and better address this sensitive issue.
Betfair has an entire page dedicated to responsible gambling, in which they talk about how to set limits on deposits, losses, and transfers; how to self-delete your account; how to establish a pause where your account will be suspended for a certain time; how to activate reminders to stop playing; and how to be aware that you are having a problem.
Betfair has Gamecare and Gambling Therapy RG initiatives. Additionally, they have NetNanny and CyberPatrol – parental control mechanisms to make sure minors do not gamble. They also have a calculator to help adjust how much to spend in gambling, which can be useful to players considering limiting their spending.
Betano has a Responsible Gambling Policy in which they talk about how to configure financial limits; how to perform temporary closure or self-exclusion; and a test with questions to find out if the player is overspending.
Regarding RG initiatives, Betano has only Gambling Therapy, and it is not involved in any additional ones.
KTO has a complete Responsible Gambling Policy, explaining how to set limits on deposits, losses, bets, time-outs, and session limits; how to self-exclude the account; and how to look for help when needed – with a strong policy against underage betting.
Regarding RG initiatives, KTO is part of Gamecare, Gambling Therapy, plus IBJR (the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming).
Bet365
Bet365 has a Responsible Gaming Policy focused on deposit limits and time alerts – which we noticed do not work for poker games, and must be sent as a request that will be analyzed within 24 hours. An additional tool is that they recommend apps for blocking betting sites (gamblock, and betfilter), a differentiator among other brands.
Regarding RG initiatives, bet365 is part of Gamecare, Gambling Therapy, and IBJR, plus Gamblers Anonymous.
Betway has a very comprehensive Responsible Gaming Policy, with both basic and detailed information as we go through it. Also, the RG policy pops up in the registration, which is a nice touch.
They also have an interesting option called auto-play controls, in which players can select the amount to bet and loss limits before starting to play; they can also choose to pause the game when the jackpot is hit, limiting their losses.
Regarding RG initiatives, Betway has Gambling Therapy and Gamblers Anonymous, plus they refer Gamble Aware to at-risk players.
Pokerstars has an extensive RG Policy page (with different support links for different countries), with terminology, direct links, and an exclusive section on how the player can identify they are at-risk and what to do to address it.
They have several self-exclusion options – freezing periods from 12 hours to 120 days, plus over 6 months, during tournaments, and permanent self-exclusions. They also recommend Gamban and Gameblock (apps for blocking betting sites), and NetNanny and Safekids (parental control tools to ensure minors do not gamble).
Parimatch has one of the loosest policies regarding Responsible Gaming, with several important points missing – and only topics about self-exclusion and testing available. In general, the information is not clear on the website, which can undermine the players’ potential to look for help.
Regarding RG initiatives, they have Gambling Therapy and Gamblers Anonymous marked on their RG policy page – but usually, they try to solve RG inquiries on chat or by blocking the account, not referring to other support links.
Esportes da Sorte has a weak Responsible Gambling Policy, focusing mostly on deposit limits and self-exclusion.
Regarding RG initiatives, they offer links to Gambling Therapy, Gamblers Anonymous, plus the Gordon Moody Association. They also provide two tools for parental control (NetNanny, CyberPatrol, and Contentwatch); and an app for blocking betting sites (Betfilter).
Sportingbet has an easy-to-understand RG policy; however, it is incomplete and outdated (2020). They provide two tools for parental control (NetNanny, and Cybersitter), and an extra test to find out if the user is having gambling problems – carried out by Harvard Medical School.
Regarding RG initiatives, they have Gambling Therapy, plus Gamblers Anonymous.
Pixbet has a superficial RG policy, with a poor layout that discourages the user from reading it. On the other hand, they recommend taking the self-test offered by Harvard Medical School.
Regarding RG initiatives, they have Gambling Therapy, plus the Division on Addictions and Virando o Jogo (the link to this last one, however, is not working).
Next, we will evaluate the experience with the RG test in the online casinos, and assess their effectiveness in handling this issue and ethical approach.
Support Approach on RG Issues – How Empathetic The Online Casinos Were?
Responsible gambling is often dealt with by mature markets (e.g., the EU, the US, and Australia) with licensing systems and government-mandated regulations. For most reputable iGaming operators, however, this is a matter of professional ethics contributing to the industry’s transparency and trustworthiness.
That is why we consider it important that customer support staff knows how to handle RG-related queries. As a player’s first point of contact, empathy is essential, especially because these are not merely technical aspects but a sensitive topic that requires dedication and competent guidance.
Although most of the casinos analyzed in this study have a specific “Responsible Gaming/Gambling” FAQ section, we assessed their professional ethics in terms of personal and corporate standards of behavior.
The test consisted of asking, anonymously, a version of the following question: “I am feeling an urge to gamble, even though I don’t think it’s a good idea”. It is a way to see how the agents react to a player with risky behavior – if they will give recommendations for help (gambleaware, Gamestop, for example) or if they will encourage gambling anyway.
Below, we describe the reaction of each casino consumer support team and our evaluation of their attitude when posed with the issue.
Betfair
On Betfair, we had contrasting experiences.
First, the attendant was thoughtful of our concerns and redirected us to Gordon Moody’s page, explained what it was, and informed us that it would be better not to open an account with Betfair and exclude me from other platforms.
On the other hand, we were asked several times for personal details, and motivated to register even after mentioning we were losing money by playing too much.
In summary, we noticed that not all agents on Betfair are properly trained to deal with these questions – especially those who do not want to identify themselves.
Experience: Diverging
Effective: First, Yes. Second, No.
Ethical: First, Yes. Second, No.
Betano
On Betano, we had contrasting experiences.
In one test, when we mentioned we “had been playing for some time, and felt that we should stop, but didn’t know how”, the attendant insisted on getting personal data.
They informed us that they needed to check the details of users who came in asking for help via chat, which was inconsistent with the approach from other attendants. In the end, they did not direct us to Betano’s Responsible Gaming Policy or any of the help links in the policy.
However, they suggested we should talk to friends/close people about what was happening and reinforced that at Betano they take responsible gaming very seriously. Despite not offering me any practical help, they were sympathetic and thoughtful.
In another try, we were motivated to register and play Fortune Tiger even after mentioning we were losing money by playing too much.
Experience: Diverging
Effective: No
Ethical: Somewhat
KTO
On KTO, we had good and consistent experiences, backed by genuine concern for our situation.
At first, one attendant asked for personal details, but after reinforcing that we would like to remain anonymous, he stated that KTO encourages all its customers to actively participate in the management of their gaming account, thus offering a variety of responsible gaming features.
They also mentioned that if we were having difficulty controlling bet spending or stopping betting after a loss, it is possible to set limits on our account, both for deposits and losses, and also take a break, and offered the link to it.
In another test, we also received all RG tools and initiatives when talking about the “urge to gamble”, and the agents showed empathy.
Experience: Consistent
Effective: Yes
Ethical: Yes
Bet365
On bet365, we had a consistent support experience in RG, although they could have had a more sympathetic approach to it.
In one test, the attendant informed us that they had a section where I could find out more about gaming problems, directing us to the responsible gaming policy.
Furthermore, they also offered to transfer the chat to an attendant who specialized in helping people with this type of issue. After making comments about the “urge to gamble”, we got account restrictions and couldn’t play. They also asked us questions like “are you in control of your game?” and asked us to explain our gambling problem better.
They were RG rules and the CS team was very professional, although they could have more “tact” with it.
Experience: Consistent
Effective: Somewhat
Ethical: Yes
Betway
On Betway, we have contrasting experiences, between a shallow and a very thorough and empathetic one.
The first one provided superficial information and wasn’t prepared to handle a sensitive issue, asking for personal data on a cold approach.
The second service was extremely good. The attendant spent about 15 minutes with us and when we mentioned having gaming problems, they were sympathetic to the situation. They said the best thing would be to contact the sites where we might have accounts and ask them to close them.
They also explained that the game is made for fun, but that if it is causing any harm, the best approach is to stop immediately. They reinforced that even if we didn’t have an account at Betway, they care a lot about this, and provided links to organizations aimed at helping people who feel harmed by gambling and that visiting them could help.
Experience: Consistent
Effective: First, No. Second, Yes
Ethical: First, No. Second, Yes
Pokerstars
On Pokerstars, we had consistent experiences, with a thoughtful approach.
When we mentioned we were betting and losing, but didn’t know how to stop, the attendant was friendly and informed us that the platform has some responsible gambling tools, such as auto deposit limits, and self-exclusion, and clearly explained how they worked and provided support links on their RG policy.
In another attempt, the agent also sent some RG links and supported our initiative of trying to identify if my gaming patterns were normal.
Experience: Consistent
Effective: Somewhat
Ethical: Somewhat
Parimatch
On Parimatch, we had a bad experience, with attendants unprepared to deal with RG issues.
We struggled to get support after saying we felt we were having problems with games, that we were losing but didn’t know how to stop playing.
After a long time of waiting, they said they understood the situation, that the experience needed to be something fun and responsible, and that we needed to analyze our behavior to make sure it was not affecting our well-being and finances.
Only after insisting on the matter, they shared a link to Gambling Therapy, but immediately encouraged us to create an account with them in case we “weren’t experiencing these difficulties”. This is highly unprofessional since a player with actual problems could feel persuaded to continue gambling, despite their issues – showing a lack of empathy and care for the player’s well-being.
In another attempt, the only option mentioned was pausing/excluding the account, with no further links or support.
Experience: Bad
Effective: No
Ethical: No
Esportes da Sorte
On Esportes da Sorte, we had consistent experiences.
When we presented the issue, they gave the same answer the chatbot gave, informing me that we could access the Responsible Gaming page on the website and providing links to the organizations mentioned on their site.
In another attempt, we received all RG tools available when mentioning the “urge to gamble”.
Experience: Consistent
Effective: Somewhat
Ethical: Yes
Sportingbet
On Sportingbet, we had consistent experiences.
When mentioning we were having problems with gaming, and didn’t know how to stop playing even after losing, they replied that the most important thing is to know that their website is for leisure and entertainment.
They also mentioned that it is not ideal for the user to depend on the values of their plays/withdrawals for urgent matters, their goal is fun and not a source of income.
In another attempt, they emphasized that they do not recommend using the winnings to pay bills or urgent matters and that the casino is for fun and entertainment, and ‘we are here to ensure the safety of all our customers’.
Experience: Consistent
Effective: Yes
Ethical: Yes
Pixbet
On Pixbet, we had a consistent experience as well.
The attendant informed us that the platform has a social responsibility, providing the general public with awareness and information, and promoting moderate and responsible gaming.
On another try, they told us that the platform recommends that users observe their gambling routines and seek help if they understand that gambling has become an addiction, sending us the link to gambling therapy.
Experience: Consistent
Effective: Yes
Ethical: Yes
Overall Performance: The Winners and Losers
After these rigorous tests and analyzing key KPIs (Speed, Effectiveness, Quality, Ethics), we identified the top performers and the worst performers among the tested online casino supports.
The winners are:
- KTO – Demonstrated consistently high performance along the tests, excelling in the RG test and securing the top position with the highest final score.
- Betano – Performed consistently in all metrics, with a minor shortcoming in the RG test, showing room for improvement in this topic.
- Sportingbet – Secured the top three by showcasing one of the fastest answers on the support, and a solid performance with scores above 4 across the board.
The losers are:
- Betway – Positioned at the bottom of the list, with the lowest scores across various metrics, showing a lack of preparedness of their support to answer simple and complex questions
- Pokerstars – The second worst performance, with a clear struggle from the support to provide timely and effective answers.
Overall, the top 10 casinos had a regular performance in the Responsible Gambling test – showing, however, a tendency to awareness and actionable insights on RG issues.
Main Takeaways – What Changed from the Last Test?
In our first test, we selected the 7 most popular online casino brands at the time – Bet365, Betano, KTO, Betfair, Betway, EstrelaBet, and Sportingbet.
All of them, except Estrelabet, appear here again, with four new names: Pokerstars, Parimatch, Esportes da Sorte, and Pixbet.
Also, we have additional metrics assessed this time:
- Ease of Access Support Links
- FAQs Depth
- CS Automation
- Reclame Aqui Scores
- RG Tools and Initiatives
Regarding the winners/losers results, KTO took the lead as the best online casino customer support, pushing Betano down to the second highest. The bottom has a new name, Betway, showcasing the dynamic nature of this assessment.
Emphasizing the importance of player trust and customer-focused operations, we see the following key findings stand out:
- Improvements in Response Time: Casinos with longer response times (e.g., bet365) should focus on optimizing their support channels for quicker assistance. Not responding is not an option!
- Enhanced Training on Responsible Gambling: All casinos (particularly Parimatch and Betway) would benefit from investing in comprehensive training for customer support agents on handling RG queries with empathy, tact, and effectiveness.
- Improvements in Internal and External Support Sources: Most of the casinos limited themselves to live chat support, not offering other sources or even email support (Betfair and bet365). Externally, they should invest in building their reputation in Reclame Aqui – since it is a crucial source for Brazilian customers (especially bet365, Betway, and Pokerstars).
- Regular Evaluation and Adaptation: Regular re-assessment of customer support performance and policy updates according to evolving customer needs is essential for maintaining a competitive edge.
