A cohort contains 40 qualified FTDs. CPA at €100 equals €4,000. With €9,000 NGR, 45% RevShare equals €4,050. The first-month totals are similar, but later economics depend on repeat deposits and retention.
What happened
FTDs that satisfy the agreed CPA criteria
The fixed rate and hold rules
NGR for the same cohort and comparable period
Repeat-deposit behaviour after month one
Control questions
- Compare one-day CPA with multi-month RevShare
- Treat every registration as a qualified action
- Ignore refunds, bonuses and negative NGR
Practical steps
- Count only approved CPA events
- Calculate RevShare from closed NGR
- Add months two and three of cohort life
- Compare payment timing and adjustment risk
Why month one is not a final answer
€4,000 CPA and €4,050 RevShare look almost equal, but their risk profiles differ. CPA depends on approval and hold; RevShare depends on later cohort value. Add months two and three, payment timing and adjustment probability before selecting a model.
The decision horizon
Month one answers only the short-term cash-flow question. Add months two and three of cohort life before selecting a permanent model. Strong repeat deposits can allow RevShare to overtake CPA later; rapidly falling quality makes the fixed payment more predictable.
Timing matters as well. CPA may be subject to hold and event review, while RevShare waits for calendar-month close. Two equal dashboard totals are not economically equal when one is available in a week and the other in six weeks.
Finding the CPA–RevShare break-even point
Forty qualified FTDs at an illustrative €100 CPA produce €4,000. At 45% RevShare, the same commission requires roughly €8,889 of NGR. This is a control calculation, not a RioAff offer. If expected cohort NGR is sustainably above that level, RevShare has more upside; if it is lower or cash timing matters, CPA can be easier to finance.
Use the same cohort and GEO. Mixing approved CPA actions with a more mature NGR cohort creates a misleading comparison.
A near tie in month one does not make the models interchangeable. CPA reduces delayed-cash risk; RevShare preserves the upside of a valuable cohort.
Frequently asked questions
Is CPA or RevShare better?
There's no single answer: CPA pays fast and predictably per FTD, while RevShare depends on player retention and can only outperform CPA on a strong cohort over several months.
Why can't you compare the two models after just one month?
The first month only shows short-term cash flow. The real difference shows up in month two or three, once retention and repeat deposits kick in.
What needs to stay identical for a fair comparison?
One country, one traffic source and one period — mixing different cohorts makes the comparison meaningless.