Regulatory uncertainty for US sweepstakes casinos continues with states like New York pushing back, while Georgia and Pennsylvania explore licensing options. Should sweepstakes casinos be legalized across the board? The ongoing debate doesn’t appear to be winding down any time soon, but it’s clear that players far and wide love this new transaction model.
In response to the never-ending buzz, TESTA deemed it timely to test key aspects of the sweepstakes casino customer journey, including onboarding, registration, deposits, gameplay, customer support, and Sweeps Coins (SCs) redemption. The testing took place in Los Angeles, California—the largest legal loophole state.
TESTA analyzed three leading sweepstakes sites that are accessible in the state: chumbacasino.com, stake.us, and mcluck.com. The testing aimed to show opportunities for innovation in the customer journey, to help operators understand where they stand and where they could potentially make gains in the market.
Methodology
TESTA used its 125-question gap analysis template for sweepstakes casinos, which evaluates each stage of the customer journey through a variety of question types.
User journeys where screen recorded across the three platforms, documenting the registration, deposit, gameplay, and withdrawal processes. Testers also evaluated the operators’ engagement features—including winner’s lists, leader boards and loyalty programs. All feedback and recordings were verified by TESTA Test Managers.
Summary of findings
TESTA’s analysis of sweepstakes casino platforms revealed consistently strong user experiences across all three platforms, with each showing distinct strengths and only minor weaknesses. One consistent challenge all platforms faced was redemption—a predictable finding given that some aspects of this withdrawal process are less familiar to first-time sweepstakes casino players.
Key strengths: All three platforms delivered crash-free gameplay, with Stake.us and McLuck standing out for structured VIP tiers and leaderboards, while Chumba’s “Winners’ Circle” offered feel-good bragging rights.
Notable hurdles: Withdrawals tripped up testers across the board. Chumba Casino had ID verification delays; Stake.us’s spending threshold held things up with testers only discovering it after deposits were made and gameplay had ensued; and for McLuck, a similar situation with testers only figuring out the withdrawal rules in the late stages of the customer journey.
Through it all, customer support was on point, but varied. Stake.us and McLuck offered the the live-chat edge over Chumba Casino’s slightly slower email exchange.
General UI & UX consistency
All platforms maintained consistent layout, images, fonts and branding across all pages. From lobby to gameplay to key processes pages, smooth scrolling and responsiveness were observed.
Registration & verification differences
Chumba’s verification emails were slightly delayed, with the first one arriving in an acceptable time of just over 5 minutes. Registration verification emails for Stake and McLuck arrived immediately. All three sites offered both email and SMS registration verification.
For registration process complexity (a key differentiating benchmark for TESTA clients), McLuck required more fields (9) and extra clicks (3); compared to Chumba (5 fields, 2 clicks); and Stake (5 fields, 2 clicks).
Mixed results for deposit verifications
Deposits were successful on all three casinos with email verification arriving shortly for both Chumba and McLuck. Stake did not send a deposit confirmation email, rather, it showed the transaction record on the website.
Solid gameplay performance
All sites delivered smooth gameplay without crashes or delays. Bets, wins, and losses were accurately processed, and balances were correctly updated.
Sweepstakes player engagement
Testers screen recorded VIP and loyalty programs, winners’ lists, and leaderboards alongside core journey stages. Also, additional research by Test Managers was undertaken to show how these engagement features vary, and how each operator maintains player interest beyond basic gameplay. The comparison reveals distinct approaches to player engagement and value creation across the three casinos.
VIP and loyalty programs
McLuck integrates loyalty and VIP into its eight-tier McLuck Loyalty Club, kicking off at Iron and hitting VIP status at Ruby (500M Gold Coins yearly), with coin boosts, rakeback-style rewards, and 24/7 hosts for top tiers.
Stake.us also offers a robust 15-tier VIP system, starting at Bronze (10,000 Stake Cash wagered) with weekly bonuses and 5% rakeback, scaling to daily reloads and personal hosts at Platinum IV and beyond.
Chumba Casino lacks a formal VIP or loyalty program, leaning on daily login bonuses (200,000 Gold Coins, 1 Sweeps Coin) and sporadic social media giveaways to keep players engaged, with occasional tailored offers for high spenders.
Winners’ Lists
Chumba Casino shines with its “Winners’ Circle,” a UGC-driven showcase of big wins—think players posing with oversized checks (some over $500K)—highlighting jackpot stories to fuel aspiration.
The other two casinos tap different engagement hooks. Stake.us features a real-time winners’ feed on its homepage, listing usernames, games, and payouts (e.g., 250,000 GC on Plinko), plus weekly $25,000 SC giveaway results shared via livestream, keeping the vibe raw and immediate.
McLuck opts for a scrolling list of similar info that shows winners on specific games, but doesn’t show the winners on the site like Chumba does. Rather, they spotlight wins through “Wall of Fame” promos and social media, like daily Spins & Wins drops (up to 200,000 GC). It appears to lack a persistent list unless playing in VIP channels.
Leaderboards
Stake.us runs dynamic leaderboards tied to events like its daily $50M GC race which is split between the top 100 positions. For every game played, players can move up the daily race leader board.
Chumba Casino doesn’t offer leaderboards, relying on its Winners’ Circle for competitive vibes without a formal ranking system.
McLuck integrates leaderboards into its McLuck Loyalty Club, notably with “Wall of Fame” contests and daily/weekly prize drops (e.g., 101 winners sharing 2M GC), rewarding top performers especially at Ruby tier and up.
Withdrawal process testing and final redemption
The withdrawal process proved to be the biggest hurdle in the sweepstakes casino customer journey across Chumba Casino, Stake.us, and McLuck. An ID / user name discrepancy during verification slowed down Chumba (not problem on the other two casinos); and Stake.us and McLuck customer journeys stalled with initial failures to make deposit minimums.
- None of the three platforms completed the first withdrawal test.
- Chumba and Stake.us couldn’t proceed with the withdrawal, and McLuck failed the withdrawal attempt.
- However, in the second withdrawal test, Stake.us and McLuck successfully processed withdrawals without delays, while Chumba was not retested.
- In the 3rd withdrawal test, Chumba successfully processed a withdrawal without delays.
Additional test rounds, spurred by these setbacks, clarified the challenges and eventual successes, providing a real-user’s view of each operator’s redemption framework.
Customer journey timelines
The customer journey timelines through registration, gameplay, and redemption across the three operators revealed distinct pacing for key milestones in the sweepstakes experience. These dates show one journey through each platform, starting in early March 2025 in California, capturing steps from sign-up to final payout as they occurred. The differences shed light on how onboarding, betting, and withdrawal processes stretched or shrank based on this tester’s interactions.
Chumba’s 25-day span shows a long tail, with a 19-day gap before betting linked to verification delays—echoing the ID snag noted earlier, eased only after support stepped in.
McLuck’s 14-day run moved steadily, with gambling starting early and a mid-point purchase, though a four-day payout stretch hints at redemption hiccups tied to process clarity.
Stake.us wrapped in 11 days, its same-day redemption and payout suggesting a tighter flow once hurdles were cleared, despite early stumbles.
Support timing stood out too: Stake.us and McLuck’s live chat likely shaved days off compared to Chumba’s email-driven delay.
Tester spending and redemption
What a tester spent and withdrew across Chumba Casino, Stake.us, and McLuck offers a snapshot of one journey’s financial arc. Withdrawal minimums mattered of course but so did luck.
These figures capture this tester’s deposits and payouts, tied to the timeline of their experience, highlighting the effort behind each redemption without standardizing across platforms.
Chat & customer support all on call
Chumba offered a Help Center as well as a Contact Us button leading to a form, which worked for tester withdrawal verification questions.
Stake and McLuck, on the other hand, featured live chat on most pages including gameplay pages, and support staff responded promptly to questions. All questions from the testers were answered via a variety of channels.
Customer support comparison
Tester interactions with customer support across Chumba Casino, Stake.us, and McLuck revealed varying levels of accessibility and responsiveness, shaping the resolution of journey hurdles like withdrawals.
Recommendations
To streamline withdrawals, operators could:
- Ease verification
- Clarify minimums earlier
- Boost support
Final redemption tests affirm all platforms can deliver, but varying friction points along the journey remain potential pain points—ones that could define user loyalty.
Conclusions
TESTA’s analysis shows where Chumba Casino, Stake.us, and McLuck align and diverge in delivering the sweepstakes experience, offering operators the raw insights needed to refine their approach.
Customer journey pathes showed all three platforms excel in gameplay reliability and visual consistency, yet engagement styles split—Stake.us and McLuck lean on competitive depth, Chumba on casual allure. Withdrawals, the toughest part, exposed friction from unclear minimums (discovered only after deposits and play). As well, there were support gaps like Chumba’s longer feedback times via email.
The testing suggests operators might gain from surfacing process details earlier and widening support reach.
Future directions for testing
- For both client reports and this one, TESTA’s sweepstakes testing has shown withdrawal snags and support gaps as ripe areas for crowdtesting.
- Testing peak-time support response could further show strengths and weaknesses.
- Specific testing on churn rates resulting from hard to find minimums.
- KYC friction could be tested across multiple states.
About the author
Ian McKinnon
TESTA Head of Marketing