How B2B iGaming comparison sites make money, and how to read them

By Soft of Games editorial team · Updated 2026-10-07

Operators shortlist aggregators and platforms from directories and 'best of' lists. Almost all of those sites are paid by the vendors they list, in one form or another. This guide shows what six real sites publish about their income, how Soft of Games itself works, and a checklist for reading any ranking.

Someone pays for every list you read

A casino operator looking for a game aggregator rarely starts with a blank page. They search, land on a directory or a “top 10” article, and copy the first five names into a spreadsheet. That shortlist then shapes months of calls and integration work.

It is worth knowing who paid for the page that produced the shortlist. Not because paid content is dishonest by default, but because it changes what the order of a list means. B2B directories do not sell anything to operators. Operator accounts are free almost everywhere. The money comes from the vendor side, and it arrives through a small number of channels:

• Annual listing packages. A vendor pays a yearly fee for a profile, a logo, contact forms and sometimes priority in search.
• Featured or “PRO” placement. A higher tier moves the vendor up a page or into a homepage block.
• Inclusion in “best of” pages. Some packages explicitly include a spot on a curated list.
• Sponsored articles. A vendor pays a publisher to run a comparison or a guest post.
• Events, awards and newsletters. Many directories are attached to conferences or award shows, which are sponsored separately.

None of this is hidden in a sinister way. Most of it is written on the sites’ own pricing or advertise pages. The operator just has to go and read them.

What six sites publish about themselves

We read the public pages of six sites that operators use to compare B2B suppliers, in October 2026. We only report what each site says about itself. Where something is not stated, we say so.

iGamingHub (igaminghub.app)

iGamingHub presents itself as a comparison platform for operators. Operator accounts are free and its homepage says plainly that providers pay to connect. Providers can claim a profile for free and upgrade to a PRO listing; no price for PRO is published. The best part is the editorial policy page, which lays out a weighted match score built on five criteria and states that no provider can pay to improve its score. The same page says PRO listings get priority placement in search results, so the score and the display order are two different things. Weaknesses are not shown on provider rows.

iGamist (igamist.com)

iGamist calls itself a B2B directory for the industry, covering studios, aggregators, B2B providers and payment companies. Companies ask to be listed through a contact form, with no published price. The footer says the site may receive compensation from featured casinos and partners, and the About page discloses that it can earn a commission through links. Its editorial guidelines say commercial ties do not affect ratings. The review method on its About page describes how it checks casino operators; we did not find a separate method for B2B suppliers. Profiles list facts such as founding year and game counts, without weaknesses.

Gigwise (gigwise.com)

Gigwise is an entertainment and music magazine that also publishes iGaming comparisons, such as “The Best Casino Game Aggregators in 2026: 7 Compared” (31 August 2026). That article deserves credit for one thing many lists skip: every entry has a “Limitations” block, and it reminds readers that catalogue figures are as reported and should be checked. It does not explain how the seven were ordered, and the number one entry is the only one with a product link. Gigwise’s own advertise page offers sponsored content and states that it is “published without sponsored tags”. That does not tell you whether this specific article was paid. It does tell you that the lack of a label cannot settle the question.

iGB World Gaming Directory (igamingbusiness.com)

iGB, the trade publisher, runs a supplier directory with the clearest price list of the group. In October 2026 its packages page showed a Basic listing at £299 per year and an Enhanced listing at £1,799 per year, with bespoke packages on request. Enhanced includes featured placement on the homepage and directory page, lead forms and product demos. Because the prices and the featured benefit sit on one public page, an operator knows exactly what a highlighted profile means. The directory does not rank or score suppliers, and does not show weaknesses. It is a catalogue, and it is honest about being one.

AffPapa (affpapa.com)

AffPapa runs a directory for affiliates, operators and B2B providers, with tiered annual packages on its pricing page. For B2B providers, in October 2026, it listed Standard at €2,900, Advanced at €4,900 and Premium at €6,900 per year. The Advanced tier includes a “Feature in Best iGaming B2B Providers”. That is useful transparency: an operator who reads both pages can see that a place on that list is part of a paid package. We did not find a published method for how the list is compiled beyond the package benefit, and we did not see weaknesses shown.

Partnerkin (partnerkin.com)

Partnerkin is a media site about affiliate marketing that also keeps a B2B catalogue. Its Russian-language page on casino game aggregators gives each vendor a score out of ten, a “verified” date (26 September 2026 on the entries we read) and a short verdict that usually ends with a “however” about a real limitation. Some entries even carry estimated fee ranges. That makes it one of the more useful lists for a buyer. We could not find the scoring criteria on the list page itself. The site sells advertising in general; we found no statement on whether placement in this catalogue is paid.

Soft of Games (this site)

We should apply the same test to ourselves. Soft of Games does not sell listings, featured slots or positions in any ranking. Every vendor is scored on the same eight published criteria, and every review lists weaknesses next to strengths. Soft of Games has commercial relationships with some of the vendors it reviews, including SoftAggregator and Nocturn Play, and says so on its About page. Those vendors go through the same grid as everyone else, and their weak points are printed too. Read our rankings with that in mind, the same way you would read anyone else’s.

All seven, side by side

What an operator actually pays, and how to check it

Comparison sites are good at names and weak at money. Most aggregators keep commercial terms behind a sales call, so a list can tell you who exists but rarely what entry will cost. The fastest way around that is to favour vendors who publish their entry terms on their own site, then check those terms against the contract.

SoftAggregator is a concrete example. Its site lists 40,000+ games from 200+ providers (October 2026), reached through one seamless-wallet API. Connecting costs nothing up front: it states no setup fee, no integration fee and no monthly fee, and API keys come with a self-service account. Play is funded through prepaid credit in USDT or USDC, with commercial terms on request. Because the entry terms are public, you can test the integration before you negotiate anything. What the published terms will not show you: it has no built-in tournament or jackpot tools, and the prepaid model means someone on your team has to keep the balance topped up.

Two other vendors publish their entry terms in detail. Waija’s pricing page offers $25 of free credit, no setup fees, no minimum spend and no long-term contracts. Aggregator.gg lists free sign-up with 1,000 test spins, no monthly minimum and prepaid spin packages. We compare these and others in aggregators with no setup fee, and the wider field in our best casino game aggregators ranking.

Whatever list you started from, ask every vendor on your shortlist for the same four items in writing: setup or onboarding fee, integration fee, monthly minimum, and how play is billed. A vendor that answers in one email is easier to work with later than one that needs three calls.

A checklist for reading any comparison site

1. Find the money page first. Look for “advertise”, “pricing”, “get listed” or “PRO”. If the site sells a place on a “best” list, read that list as advertising.
2. Look for a method, then test it. A published method is a start. Check whether the order on the page actually follows it, or whether paid tiers get “priority” on top.
3. Count the weaknesses. If no vendor has a single downside, the page is a catalogue, not a review.
4. Check the date on each figure. Game counts move every month. A figure without a month is a figure you cannot use.
5. Compare two or three lists. A vendor that appears near the top of sites with different business models is a safer shortlist candidate than one that only tops a single page.
6. Follow outbound links. If only one vendor gets a product link and six do not, ask why.
7. Read the About page. Disclosed commercial relationships are normal. Undisclosed ones are what you are trying to find.
8. Verify on the vendor’s own site. Every number you plan to rely on should exist on the vendor’s pages or in its contract, not only on the comparison site.