45% vs 60% RevShare on €8,000 NGR

Use a closed month with €8,000 NGR. A 45% rate produces €3,600; 60% produces €4,800. The €1,200 difference is meaningful only when both calculations use the same NGR definition, period and currency.

Action sequence

1. Export NGR before manual changes
2. Apply 45% and 60% to the identical base
3. Review bonuses, chargebacks and administrative deductions separately
4. Match the calculation to the next-month credit

Evidence used

Where risk appears

• Compare a 70% headline with another account actual rate
• Use deposits instead of NGR as the commission base
• Mix an open current month with a closed reporting period

What the comparison demonstrates

The €1,200 difference exists only because both percentages use the same €8,000 NGR. A different base, currency or period would invalidate the comparison. The case also shows that a larger percentage does not automatically offset weaker retention. Cohort quality and actual deductions still decide value.

Sensitivity beyond one month

The €8,000 example should be repeated for weak, base and strong months and then combined with actual retention. Sixty per cent of €5,000 NGR is €3,000, while 45% of €8,000 is €3,600. The larger percentage produces less money because the cohort creates a smaller base.

Keep the agreed rate beside its confirmation date and reporting currency. This prevents an old offer from being compared with a new one and explains why the credited amount may differ from an early forecast.

NGR sensitivity matters more than one percentage

At €8,000 NGR, 45% produces €3,600 and 60% produces €4,800. That comparison is valid only when the NGR base is identical. If the second scenario produces just €5,500 NGR after applicable deductions, 60% equals €3,300 and is lower than the first result. Store both effective NGR per cohort and the applied percentage.

Scale after several closed periods when possible. A single strong cohort can make a headline rate look more stable than the underlying player value really is.