Stake vs Roobet · USDT ERC20 payout comparison
Stake vs Roobet withdrawal times — verified USDT ERC20 comparison
Side-by-side amount distribution of 1,500+ verified on-chain USDT ERC20 settlements from Stake and Roobet payout wallets. Median, p90, p95, total outflow, recent tx examples on Etherscan.
Stake and Roobet both broadcast USDT ERC20 payouts from wallets we attribute via Arkham Intelligence. This page compares the amount distribution of their observed settlements side-by-side. Time-to-receive percentiles are not shown for either. We cannot observe operator-side approval queues without first-party tests.
What makes this pair worth comparing: Stake and Roobet are two of the highest-profile USDT ERC20 operators in our tracked set, with overlapping audiences (esports, streamers, large crypto bankrolls). Both list Curaçao licensing and both maintain a single attributable ERC20 payout wallet rather than rotating addresses, which is the case that makes on-chain comparison meaningful at all — operators with rotating or unattributed wallets do not appear on this site. The interesting question for readers is not which is “faster” (we cannot measure that without first-party tests) but how their observed payout-size distributions differ at scale — Stake's higher-volume single-payout tail vs Roobet's more-clustered mid-tier distribution.
Side-by-side USDT ERC20 payout distribution
Each column is the amount distribution of observed on-chain settlements broadcast from the operator's attributed payout wallet. Wallet attribution is verified against Arkham Intelligence. We do not publish operator-side approval-time percentiles here. We cannot observe pre-broadcast queue state without first-party tests.
Amounts in USDT token units. Percentiles are nearest-observed-rank, not interpolated. A column with no data means we have no observed activity attributed to that operator's wallet yet.
What the numbers say (and what they do not)
Plain-language readout of the comparison above. Each takeaway names what the data does and does not prove — observation volume is not a payout-speed claim, total outflow is not a reliability signal.
- Observation volume: Stake has the larger observed sample with 2,622 settlements vs 2,367 for the other operator on USDT ERC20. More observations means stronger statistical context, not a faster payout.
- Largest observed single payout on USDT ERC20: Roobet at 4,502,201 token units, vs 800,862 for the other operator. Single-large-payout data only reflects what has been broadcast; it is not a maximum-withdrawal limit promise.
- Total observed outflow on USDT ERC20: Stake 6,559,024, Roobet 22,595,040. Outflow size reflects player volume and payout cadence, not payout reliability for any individual user.
Operator profiles compared
Structural facts each operator publishes (founding year, owner, licences, supported networks). The on-chain settlement data above measures one channel; these are the editorial counterparts that frame the comparison.
Year-founded and owner data sourced from operator-published company info. Licence record is per the regulator's public register where verifiable. Networks-supported count is what the operator's withdrawal UI lists, not what payoutdb has on-chain attribution for.
Recent verified settlements
Recent on-chain payouts from each operator's attributed wallet. Click any tx to verify on the public block explorer.
- — Amount distribution is not the same as time-to-receive. We cannot observe operator-side approval time without first-party tests.
- — A larger sample size does not imply a faster operator. It implies more observed payout activity.
- — Past observed payouts do not predict any future withdrawal. Each withdrawal goes through the operator's queue at its own pace.
Frequently asked questions
Methodology notes for this comparison
Both operators' USDT ERC20 payout wallets are independently identified via Arkham Intelligence entity labels and confirmed by a payoutdb reviewer before activation. Unattributed candidate wallets stay inactive in our database. Settlements are fetched from the network's public block explorer and filtered by canonical token contract address to reject impostor tokens.
What we explicitly do not measure for either operator: the internal approval-queue time between the user's withdrawal request and the on-chain broadcast. That window is invisible to public observers and would require a first-party withdrawal test to quantify honestly. The percentile table above describes the amount distribution of settlements observed after broadcast, not the time to broadcast itself.
For a step-by-step guide on verifying any individual casino withdrawal yourself, see how to verify a crypto casino actually pays out withdrawals.