The ACES evidence record
Account benefit: not independently confirmed
As of 14 September 2026, we do not have sufficient evidence for the fee discount previously advertised with ACES. A working referral URL does not establish attribution, eligibility, a discount or rakeback activation.
We removed the percentage from sales text and metadata. To support a future offer, we would need current terms identifying the code, qualifying accounts, fee categories, duration and restrictions.
What was checked in this revision
- Current fee and rakeback help articles were compared with the terms.
- The public registration entry point and fee dialog were inspected without a funded account.
- The public licence register was searched and matched to the exact moon.com domain.
- Claims about ACES were compared with the evidence actually held by this site.
No registration was completed for this review. No deposit, bet, withdrawal or account-specific reward activation was tested.
Evidence states
| State | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Operator statement | The operator states the condition; we have not independently tested it on every account |
| Register observation | A named public register showed the entry at the recorded time |
| Not confirmed | Available evidence does not establish the claim |
| Sources differ | Relevant documents leave a material point unresolved |
| Source unavailable | A technical retrieval failed; no successful verification is implied |
Dates have different meanings
“Published” identifies the article’s original publication date. “Updated” tracks changes to the page’s content. A claim review date identifies the particular assessment recorded with that claim. We do not invent a source publication date from the date we opened it.
What automatic checks can establish
The source checker retrieves selected documents and compares specific wording with our expectations. Missing or changed wording creates a review requirement. It does not automatically prove a product change, and it does not verify all the prose on a page.
A failed or incomplete required check stops the normal release pipeline for review. Historical runs that recorded only an empty failure list are not evidence that every source was available. Automated checks do not change an existing live page by themselves.
Corrections in this revision
- Removed the unconfirmed ACES discount and the claim that a standard fee proves failed attribution.
- Removed the fixed holding interval and assumed holding-fee rakeback eligibility.
- Corrected the statement that company, country and licence information were unavailable.
- Removed the unsupported separate-reviewer label and the global benefit-verification stamp.
These are corrections to our explanation. They are not a claim that all of Moon’s product terms changed on this date.
Report a correction through the published contact address. We assess the original source and update affected pages together.
Sources
References for this guide. The review notes below include dates and questions we have not yet resolved.
Review notes
- Not confirmed ·
- We have not independently confirmed a fee discount for ACES. The referral landing page is not evidence of a discount or its eligibility rules.
- Sources differ ·
- The current fee article omits holding fees. Section 8.5 of Moon’s terms still permits them. We have not confirmed the current interval, rate or calculation base.
- Register observation ·
- The public register listed Moon International Ltd, moon.com, licence ALSI-202601063-FI2, B2C, as valid on 14 September 2026. A register entry does not establish availability in your country or guarantee the service.
- Operator statement ·
- Moon’s current rakeback article names opening fees and fees on profitable closed bets. We have not confirmed whether holding fees currently qualify.