Non-AAMS casino: number, holder, register, date

The phrase casino non aams gets 9,900 searches a month (Keyword Planner, Italy, 27.09.2026). Whoever types it is looking for operators whose licence is issued elsewhere, and the concrete question they bring with them is always the same: exactly what document does that site have, who is it in the name of and where can it be checked. This page answers only that question, with the licence numbers, the bodies that issued them, the holding companies, the dates of issue and the status the register showed when we opened it. We interpret nothing and we give no framing of any kind: we read documents and report the lines.

Sixty-eight numbers out of a hundred: the perimeter of a non-AAMS casino

Our library contains one hundred operator records, closed on 26 August 2026 with a single record updated on 2 September. Of those hundred, sixty-eight carry a licence number that we read on the operator’s pages; thirty-two do not, because we did not find it or because nothing could be read from their pages.

Two bodies cover sixty-two records out of sixty-eight. This is the starting fact for anyone assessing a non-AAMS casino: in practice it is almost always a number issued in Curaçao or in Anjouan, and in both cases there is a public register where that number can be searched by domain name. The generic indications — «government of Curaçao» with no body, or an acronym on its own — are five out of a hundred, and they are precisely the ones that give the least to check.

It is worth insisting on the difference between the two columns. A record with «Curaçao Gaming Authority» and a number in the form OGL/year/xxx/yyyy can be checked in a minute, because the portal returns a certificate with the domain written inside it. A record that says only «Curacao» and carries the old form 8048/JAZ cannot be checked in the same way, and in our files two brands share exactly that indication. When you compare two non-AAMS casinos, the form of the number already tells you how much it will be possible to verify.

What the register answers when you search the domain

We searched all one hundred domains in the two registers on 26 August 2026. The result is not a yes or a no, it is five different answers, and they are worth keeping distinct.

In the public register of Anjouan thirty-nine domains out of a hundred have an entry, and all thirty-nine show as valid. A domain not found in a register does not mean «without a licence»: it means that in that register, with that search key, it does not appear. It is a distinction we always make, because confusing «not found» with «does not exist» is the fastest way to write something untrue.

Forty-one domains not found out of a hundred is the number that most surprises anyone expecting a clear-cut outcome. It means that, for almost half the library, the simplest route — take the domain, search for it in the portal, read the certificate — leads nowhere, and you have to go through the other register or stop at what the operator declares on its own pages. Anyone assessing a non-AAMS casino should treat this step as part of the work, not as an anomaly.

The six revoked entries, on the other hand, are a precise statement by the register. They concern BC.Game with the number OGL/2023/118/0060, Bets.io with OGL/2024/1178/0479, Coinplay with OGL/2024/564/0626, and three brands — Betriot, Casinoly and Zet Casino — that share the same number OGL/2023/103/0067, in the name of Rabidi N.V. with company number 151791 and issued on 5 February 2024.

One licence line read in full

Every Curaçao certificate we opened contains five pieces of information: the domain, the company that runs it, the company number, the licence number and the date of issue, plus the current status. Lined up they give rows like these.

The Anjouan register instead returns number, company, date of issue and expiry date. Rainbet, for example, appears with ALSI-152406029-FI2, in the name of RBGAMING N.V., issued on 14 June 2024 and with a declared expiry of 13 June 2027. DuckDice appears with ALSI-202509013-FI1, in the name of Zentari Limitada, issued on 16 September 2025 and expiring on 15 September 2026. Wild Fortune appears with ALSI-202509073-FI2, Metlait SRL, issued 30 September 2025, expiring 29 September 2026.

This is the material with which a non-AAMS casino is assessed: six fields, all copyable, all re-checkable by anyone with the domain to hand. What is not in any of these fields — and which we therefore do not write — is any consideration of how that document should be interpreted elsewhere.

Dates of issue and expiry dates

Forty-three Curaçao certificates that we opened carry a date of issue. The oldest is 5 February 2024, and it is precisely the one of the now revoked number of Rabidi N.V.; the most recent among those read is 17 June 2025, of the number OGL/2024/1214/0712 in the name of Bitx Operations N.V. for playbet.io. The bulk is concentrated in the second half of 2024.

The Anjouan register adds an expiry, and here the figure is clear-cut: of the thirty-nine entries, twenty expire within 2026 and nineteen in 2027. The nearest among those read is ALSI-202509008-FI1 of Fordegens Limitada for flush.com, expiring on 2 September 2026; for that record our note says explicitly that the term has ended and that we have not re-checked it. The furthest is ALSI-202606048-FI2, in the name of 3-102-959384 SRL, issued on 30 June 2026 with expiry on 29 June 2027.

From this comes a practical rule that applies to any non-AAMS casino: a licence has a date, and a date ages. Our readings are from August and the first days of September 2026, so half of the Anjouan entries we cite come to an end by the end of that year. A number valid at our reading is not a number valid forever, and the only way to know is to reopen the register.

That is why, next to every number we publish, we also keep the date on which we read it. A list of non-AAMS casinos without dates is a list that ages in silence: anyone consulting it six months later reads the same rows without knowing that in the meantime half the entries may have expired, been renewed with a new number or passed to another holding company.

Nine numbers for twenty-four brands

In the hundred records there are fifty-three distinct licence numbers. Nine of those numbers appear on more than one brand, and together they cover twenty-four brands. The largest group is ALSI-202508056-FI2, in the name of Novatrix SRL, issued on 25 August 2025 with expiry on 24 August 2027: it is shared by Oshi Casino, PlayAmo, Slotum, Winz.io and Bitkingz.

The consequence is concrete. Opening two accounts at two brands that share the same number does not mean having two counterparties: it means having one, seen from two shop windows. Anyone splitting a balance between two twin sites believing they are reducing their exposure is not reducing it. Why a brand reappears with another address and another look is the subject of the page on why casinos change domain.

When the two registers do not say the same thing

Thirty-nine brands out of a hundred have a valid entry in the Anjouan register. For seven of them there is in parallel an Active certificate in the Curaçao portal, with a different number and a different holding company. They are Metaspins, Roobet, Thrill, Thunderpick, TrustDice, Wild.io and Playbet.io.

Two cases are clearer than the others, because the two registers contradict each other on status. BC.Game has the number OGL/2023/118/0060 revoked in Curaçao and, at the same time, ALSI-202410011-FI1 valid in Anjouan, in the name of Twocent Technology Limited with expiry on 1 October 2026. Bets.io has OGL/2024/1178/0479 revoked and ALSI-202410047-FI2 valid, in the name of TESSERA LIMITED SRL with expiry on 17 October 2026.

We do not choose which of the two entries is the one that counts. We record that there are two, that they carry different names and that one of the two says revoked. For anyone assessing a non-AAMS casino this is more useful information than any judgement: it means that the question «who is my counterparty» has two simultaneous answers, and that it is worth knowing before opening an account rather than after. The page on the dispute with a foreign operator shows where this double holding really weighs.

What the licence number does not say

A number confirmed in a register is the heaviest component of our score — it is worth 2.5 points out of ten — but it is not the only one, and on its own it does not describe a relationship. Fifty-six records out of a hundred take those 2.5 points in full; seven take 0.8 because the licence is declared by the operator but we have not confirmed it in the register, as in the case of Rocketpot and Wolf.bet; five take zero for revocation; thirty-two are left with the box empty.

Alongside the number the other rows are needed. Forty-nine operators out of a hundred have a clause on document verification that we managed to read, and only five write a figure: Bitcasino.io, Sportsbet.io and Livecasino.io state 2,500 euros or the equivalent in cryptocurrency, Rocketpot 2,500 dollars, Empire.io 2,000 USDT. Fourteen out of a hundred declare a withdrawal cap, from Oshi Casino’s 4,000 euros a day to Bitcasino.io’s 1,000,000 USDT a week. Thirty-eight out of a hundred publish the list of countries they declare they do not serve, and in those thirty-eight lists the Italian code appears only once, in Crashino’s list.

The full picture, with the scores out of ten points and the boxes left empty, is in the table of migliori casinò con criptovalute. For the method component by component there is the page on online casinos; for the digital money side, that is which currencies an operator declares it settles in, the starting point is the page on the best USDT casinos in Italy.