Most operators who want to change aggregator already know why. Adding a provider through their current casino aggregator can take weeks of development work, and the monthly invoice rarely matches the platform’s own reports.
What holds them back is the switch itself. A casino that’s trading can’t go offline for a weekend while its game catalogue is moved from one supplier to another.
Parallel migration changes how that move happens. Instead of a single cutover date, both aggregators run at the same time until the new integration has proven itself under real conditions.
Join The European Business Briefing
New subscribers this quarter are entered into a draw to win a Rolex Submariner. Join 40,000+ founders, investors and executives who read EBM every day.
SubscribeWhy a single cutover date carries so much risk
The traditional approach is often called a big bang migration. The old integration is switched off and the new one goes live in the same window, usually overnight.
If anything breaks, there’s nothing to fall back on. Missing games and failed transaction calls reach players straight away, and the support team deals with every complaint at once.
The technology supplier Altenar points out that most migration failures don’t come from unexpected technical faults. They tend to come from rushed launches that skip thorough sandbox testing, along with poor communication to players about what’s changing.
Regulatory exposure adds to the pressure. A migration that mishandles player data or compliance reporting could lead to fines or a licence review, which puts an operator’s position in that market at risk.
How parallel migration works
Parallel migration keeps the current aggregator live while the new one is connected alongside it. The operator’s platform decides which aggregator handles each game request, based on routing rules the operator sets.
Those rules might send specific player segments to the new integration or split sessions by percentage. The process usually follows four stages.
Integrate alongside the current setup
The new aggregator is connected while the existing one carries all live sessions, so nothing changes for players at this point. The work can also take place during a notice period on the old contract, which means the integration can be ready by the time that agreement ends.
Test with a share of real sessions
Sandbox checks only show so much. Once the integration passes them, a small share of production sessions is routed to the new aggregator. Teams can then compare load times and transaction handling under live conditions, while the current provider serves everyone else.
Move sessions across at your own pace
When the results hold up, more sessions move across. This can happen gradually in percentage steps or as a full cutover once the team is confident in the data.
Keep the rollback option open
The old integration stays connected until it’s no longer needed. If an issue appears, requests can be pointed back to the previous aggregator while it’s fixed. That’s a very different position from trying to restore a connection that’s already been switched off.
Mapping the game portfolio before you move
Content continuity is often the biggest practical concern. Players expect to find the same providers after a switch, and any gaps in the lobby are noticed quickly.
Before migration starts, the current portfolio should be mapped against the new aggregator’s network. This shows which providers are available straight away and which need adding. It also flags anything that needs a commercial conversation before the cutover.
Contract terms matter at this stage too. Industry guidance on choosing an aggregator recommends checking exclusivity clauses and data portability before signing, so operators know whether their reporting data can move with them later.
What happens to transaction history
Historical transaction data usually stays with the outgoing provider under its retention policy. The new aggregator records transactions from the point of integration onwards.
Finance and compliance teams should export and archive what they need from the old back office before access ends. It’s worth agreeing that export window in writing early, because it’s easy to overlook once the new platform is live.
Keeping player protection intact during the switch
Responsible gambling controls need to carry across without a gap. Deposit limits and self-exclusion records often sit at the operator level, but any tool that relies on data from the games themselves should be tested on the new integration before sessions reach it.
Parallel running helps here as well, because these checks can be completed on a small share of sessions first. Signposting to trusted organisations for anyone who needs support with their gambling should stay visible throughout any platform change.
A lower risk route to a better setup
Switching aggregators doesn’t have to hinge on one overnight cutover. Running both integrations side by side gives operators time to test under real conditions and move sessions across only when the data supports it.
This is the approach Games Valley takes with operators moving from another aggregator. The existing setup stays live until the new integration has been fully validated.
