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.
New Year Riches
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.25%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 0
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Cash Pump
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.86%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- 0
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Forge of Wealth
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.74%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
New Year Riches vs Cash Pump
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP: 96.25% against 96.86% — Cash Pump is 0.61 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 2.0×: 5,000× against 10,000×, with Cash Pump higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
New Year Riches vs Forge of Wealth
- Different format families: New Year Riches is Fixed paylines, Forge of Wealth is Standard video slot. Read each screen with its own rule set.
- They come from different studios — Play’n GO and PG Soft — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.25% against 96.74% — Forge of Wealth is 0.49 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 5,000× and 5,000×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Forge of Wealth does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
