Dandy Diamonds RTP and max win, figure by figure, with the source of each

The return: four builds, and the operator installs one

The figure a reader is most likely to have met for this title is 96.33%. It appears on six separate pages we hold, including the trade report published when the game went out. One of those pages does not call it the return: it calls it the default configuration, which is a narrower and more careful claim.

A seventh page prints the whole ladder in a field of its own: 96.33%, 94.26%, 92.26%, 86.32%, with the note that a casino may set the game's return anywhere within that set. On its own, one page carrying a four-step ladder would not be enough to publish, particularly as the same page is loose about the mechanics — it hedges on whether this game pays by lines or by clusters, and describes the merge as something the game does to a single symbol rather than as four Diamonds joining. Both of those are wrong against the studio's own text.

What the ladder rests on

What makes the ladder publishable is that the middle of it is visible elsewhere, twice, without that page's help. A British gambling site prints 94.26% in the terms attached to its own copy of this game — an operator stating the return of the build it is running, which is as close to first-hand as this kind of figure gets. And a second operator serves its free round for the title from an address whose game identifier ends in 94. Separately, 92.26% is printed by another catalogue as though it were simply the game's return.

The bottom rung, 86.32%, rests on that one page alone. It is printed here as part of the ladder and named as that page's, and a reader who wants to know which build is in front of them has one reliable place to look: the game's own information panel at the operator they are using. That panel is where the figure in force is shown, and it is the only source that is about their session rather than about the title.

Volatility, and the two words in circulation

Medium is the word our record uses, the word the trade report uses, and the word four catalogues use; one of those four places the game three out of five on its own scale, which is the same statement in a different unit. Two other catalogues call it high instead, one of them describing it as high-variance in the same sentence in which it gives the ceiling correctly.

Both words are printed here because neither is measurable from outside and because the split is not even. A reader deciding whether this title behaves like the studio's better-known releases is better served by knowing that most sources put it below them and two do not, than by a single adjective chosen by majority and presented as a fact.

Reels, grid and paylines

The board is five reels across and five rows down: 25 positions. The studio does not state the row count in words on anything we can read, and the figure here is counted off the studio's own artwork for the game; the trade report gives five rows and five reels in writing, as do two catalogues. The line count is 19, fixed, evaluated from the leftmost reel. That one is not ours and not the studio's: it comes from the trade report and two catalogues, and nothing disputes it.

Two details sit behind the shape rather than beside it. A merge needs a square, so a square board is the condition for the game's second mechanic existing at all. And a Bolt measures its reach as a three-by-three square, which on a board five positions deep means a Bolt can reach every row except when it lands on the outer edge. Neither of those is a figure, but both are consequences of one.

The ceiling, the stake range and the release

5,000x of the stake is the published maximum, and it is the one headline number on this title with nothing behind it in disagreement: our record, the trade report and six catalogues all carry it. Note what is not stated along with it — no source we hold says which round it is reached in, and one catalogue attaches it to a secondary bonus of its own naming that matches nothing in the studio's text. That attribution is not repeated here.

The stake range runs from 0.10 to 200 by the trade report and one catalogue. Neither names a currency, and neither does this page: the unit a reader sees is their operator's, and inventing a symbol for it would be inventing a fact. The title was released in June 2026. No exact day is printed anywhere on this site.

What counts as confirmation on a page like this

Four kinds of source stand behind the rows above, and they are not interchangeable. The strongest is the studio's own page for the game. It cannot be read by a machine — the studio puts its own age question in front of every game page, so what comes back is the question rather than the game — but full-resolution captures of that page were made while this network was first built, and the feature wording on this site is read off them. That is why the rules on these pages are quoted confidently and the figures are not: the studio's page is generous with the first and silent about the second.

Next is the trade report published when the title went out. It repeats the studio's rules closely enough to be recognisable as the same text, and it adds the metrics block the studio page does not carry: rows, reels, lines, the top return figure, the word for the volatility, the stake range and the ceiling. A report that gets the rules right is a report that was looking at this game, which is most of what can be asked of a second-hand source.

Our own record, and the catalogues

Third is our own earlier record of this title, which is this project's source of record and which carries two things nothing else does: the extended multiplier set inside the third round, and the retrigger amounts. Fourth are the catalogues, which are the only carriers of the return ladder and the purchase prices and are named as catalogues every time.

Agreement is not confirmation

The rule applied throughout is simple and it is the reason the ladder is on this site at all. Several pages printing the same figure to the second decimal is one source wearing several coats; it tells you where a number travelled, not whether it is true. A figure that turns up in a different kind of place — an operator's own terms, a game address, a report written from the studio's text — has been confirmed, because the second sighting could not have been copied from the first.

The same rule cuts the other way, and it is why one catalogue on this topic is used for exactly one thing. A page that hedges on whether this game pays by lines or by clusters is a page that did not open it, and a page that did not open it is not a witness to its mechanics. Its data field is kept because the middle of it is corroborated twice over by sources that owe it nothing; its prose is not used anywhere on this site.

Figures that are not printed here, and why

There is no hit frequency on this site. Our record of some neighbouring titles carries one and this title's record does not, and a rate of that kind comes out of a mathematics sheet rather than out of a description. There is no score, rating or star figure either, for the plainer reason that nothing here measures one; one page we hold shows a rating on zero votes, which is a number about nobody.

Purchased entries are priced by one catalogue and those prices are on the feature page as that catalogue's. No bonus figure, wagering requirement, licence number, deposit limit or payout window appears anywhere here, because nothing we hold confirms one, and a wrong number helps a reader less than a missing one.

Names that collect this title's figures by mistake

The studio's catalogue holds several titles whose names begin the same way — Danny Dollar, Donny and Danny, Donut Division — and at least one of them is built on the same square board with the same line count, so a figure read off the wrong card looks entirely plausible. Separately, one catalogue describes this title as an extension of the studio's earlier Ultimate Slot of America, whose ceiling is twice this one's. None of those titles' numbers belong on this page and none of them has been used on it.

RTP and volatility in practice

Six questions, answered with the figure and its publisher together. Two of them are answered as disagreements, because that is what the sources are.