Structure comparison
Two games, side by side
The structural difference between two games, assembled from published specifications only. Nothing here forecasts a result or recommends either game.

Mahjong Ways
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.92%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 25,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
Caishen Wins
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS

Coins of Fortune
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.48%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 6,015×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Mahjong Ways vs Caishen Wins
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- RTP cannot be compared: Caishen Wins does not publish one.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Mahjong Ways does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Mahjong Ways vs Coins of Fortune
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- They come from different studios — PG Soft and Nolimit City — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.92% against 96.48% — Mahjong Ways is 0.44 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 4.2×: 25,000× against 6,015×, with Mahjong Ways higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Mahjong Ways does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Add to the comparison (up to four)



