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.
Fruity Treats
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Cascading reels
- RTP
- 96.05%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Fruit & classic
VS
Diamond Cascade
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Cascading reels
- RTP
- 96.06%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 8,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Fruit & classic
VS
Fortune Rabbit
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.75%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- East Asia
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Fruity Treats vs Diamond Cascade
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Cascading reels. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.05% against 96.06%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.6×: 5,000× against 8,000×, with Diamond Cascade higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Shared theme signals: Fruit & classic.
Fruity Treats vs Fortune Rabbit
- Different format families: Fruity Treats is Cascading reels, Fortune Rabbit is Standard video slot. Read each screen with its own rule set.
- They come from different studios — Pragmatic Play and PG Soft — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.05% against 96.75% — Fortune Rabbit is 0.70 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: Fortune Rabbit does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
