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.
Sweet Alchemy Bingo
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 97.57%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 5×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Sweets
VS
Honey Honey Honey
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.50%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 910×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Sweets
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- They come from different studios — Play’n GO and Pragmatic Play — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 97.57% against 96.50% — Sweet Alchemy Bingo is 1.07 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 182.0×: 5× against 910×, with Honey Honey Honey higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Sweet Alchemy Bingo returns more in theory over the long run, while Honey Honey Honey reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
- Shared theme signals: Sweets.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
