How this site is built: dates, sources, and the dash rule

How this site is built starts with a plain answer to a plain question: what did anyone here actually check, and when. Every figure on this site traces back to one of three date ranges below, or to one of two money tests, or it does not appear at all.

Nothing on this site is filled in from memory, from a general impression of an operator, or from another review site's write-up. Where a document was not found, the field says so.

How this site is built, in three dates

The window for reading operator terms ran from 24 August to 12 September 2026. Every clause number, figure, and quoted line this site attributes to a specific operator's own document — a terms page, a help-centre article, an FAQ, or a banking page — was pulled from a document read somewhere inside that stretch of dates.

Licence registers were checked separately, between 8 and 13 September 2026, against each operator's own domain, to confirm whether a certificate on file matched the business actually running the site rather than a different brand entirely.

XRP-specific cashier facts — the figures that describe whether and how an individual operator's own document names XRP in a deposit list, a withdrawal list, or a minimum-amount table — were captured on 2 September 2026, as a single pass across every operator this site tracks. That is also the source date behind what best means on this site.

The two money tests, and no others

This site ran two money tests with its own funds, and this page names both of them because no others exist. On 28 August 2026, at Vave, the editorial team put its own money in and took its own money back out; no verification request arrived up to about 5,000 USDT, though clause 8.7 of Vave's own terms reserves the right to ask for one at any time before a withdrawal.

TrustDice was the site of the second money test, run in May 2026. Deposits went in over several weeks, withdrawals cleared unchecked up to about 5,000 USD, and then came a “payment under review” notice, a Veriff identity check, a rejected driver's licence, and finally a passport accepted on the fifth attempt — followed later by a second document request sent by email.

Neither test singled out XRP as the deposit or withdrawal currency, and this site does not imply that it did. No other operator has a money test behind any figure printed here — where a claim would need one and none exists, the field is left blank.

Why an empty field prints a dash

Some operators have no XRP fact on file at all — their cashier sits behind a login this site did not access, or no relevant document was found during the reading window above. For those operators, this site does not guess a figure, does not borrow a number from a similar-looking operator, and does not infer an answer from marketing copy. The field prints a dash, and a dash means exactly one thing: nothing was found, not that something negative was found.

This rule applies the same way whether the missing fact is a minimum amount, a fee figure, or a licence detail. A dash is not a lower score by default and it is not a verdict — it is a record of what this site did and did not find inside the reading windows above.

The dual meter, plainly

Where an operator's own document names XRP specifically — in a deposit list, a withdrawal list, a minimum-amount table, or a similar first-party source — this site scores that operator against five XRP-specific criteria. Where no such document exists for an operator, the meter falls back to the network's standard identity-check criteria instead, so that every operator on the table gets a reading rather than a gap.

That fallback is not a lesser version of the same score, and it is not comparable number-for-number against an XRP-specific score — it is a different measurement, used only when the XRP-specific one has nothing to measure. Which operators get which meter, and the full ranking that results, is not built on this page; it lives on the home page, and this page exists only to say how the underlying reading was done.

How this site is built, applied to a single page

It helps to see the whole approach applied to one concrete example rather than treated as an abstract rule. Take the account-reserve page elsewhere on this site: every sentence attributing a fact to the XRP Ledger itself, such as the existence of a base reserve every account must hold, draws on the same network-level documentation this site treats as a permanent, dated reference rather than something requiring re-verification on a per-operator basis. Every sentence naming a specific operator's own number, such as Bitcasino.io's 0.31 XRP minimum deposit, traces back to the 24 August–12 September 2026 reading window above, and if that specific figure had not turned up inside that window, the page would print a dash instead of a guess, exactly as this page describes.

That is, in miniature, how this site is built on every page it publishes: separate what the network itself guarantees from what an individual operator's own document happens to state, source the second kind of fact to a dated reading window, and never let an absence of information get silently filled in with an assumption. The two money tests follow the identical rule — they are named, dated, and attributed to the specific operator each one involved, and no figure from either test is generalised to an operator that was not actually tested.

Readers who want to check any specific figure against its source are, in effect, being handed the method rather than asked to trust it. A clause number points to a real clause in a real document, read inside a stated window; a dash points to the honest absence of one. Nothing on this site asks to be taken on faith beyond that.

The result of applying this method to twelve operators is the table at best ripple casinos, the page this method page supports.