Wagering Requirement Mathematics, Done Properly

Most writing about wagering requirements stops at "a 35 times requirement on a 100 euro bonus means 3,500 euro of turnover", which is true and almost useless. It tells you how much work there is, not whether the work is worth doing. This guide does the rest of the arithmetic: what the turnover costs, where the break-even point sits, why it moves with the game you clear on, and how game weighting and conversion caps change the answer. Every figure below is worked from first principles so you can check it.

The only three numbers that matter

Strip away the presentation and any bonus reduces to three quantities:

• B — the bonus amount credited.
• T — the total turnover you must generate before the bonus can convert.
• h — the house edge of the game you will generate that turnover on.

The expected cost of producing turnover T on a game with edge h is h × T. So the bonus is worth taking, in expectation, when what you receive exceeds what the clearing costs:

B > h × T

That inequality is the whole subject. Everything else is a matter of working out what T actually is for a given set of terms.

Turnover: what the multiplier actually multiplies

The multiplier is the easy half. The wagering base is where the money is, and it is stated in a single clause that most players skim.

• Bonus only: T = W × B
• Deposit plus bonus: T = W × (D + B)

On a 100% match — deposit 100, receive 100 — the second base is twice the first, so the same multiplier represents double the work. A 30 times requirement on deposit plus bonus is a 60 times requirement dressed as a 30.

This is the single most common way an offer is misread, and it is settled by one sentence in the terms. Find it before you compare anything else.

The break-even multiplier is one divided by the house edge

Set the inequality to equality and solve for the multiplier. Taking the bonus-only case, T = W × B, so:

B = h × W × B, and B cancels, leaving W = 1/h

The bonus amount drops out entirely. The break-even wagering multiplier does not depend on how big the bonus is — only on the house edge of the game you clear it on. At 96% return to player, h = 4%, so:

W = 1 / 0.04 = 25 times

Below 25 times on a bonus-only requirement, the offer has positive expected value. Above it, negative. That is a hard threshold you can carry in your head, and it moves with the game:

• RTP 94% (h = 6%): break-even 16.7× bonus-only, 8.3× on deposit plus bonus
• RTP 95% (h = 5%): break-even 20.0× bonus-only, 10.0× on deposit plus bonus
• RTP 96% (h = 4%): break-even 25.0× bonus-only, 12.5× on deposit plus bonus
• RTP 97% (h = 3%): break-even 33.3× bonus-only, 16.7× on deposit plus bonus
• RTP 98% (h = 2%): break-even 50.0× bonus-only, 25.0× on deposit plus bonus

The deposit-plus-bonus column assumes a 100% match; the general form is W = 1/(h × (1 + D/B)). Notice how much the game moves the answer. The same 30 times offer is comfortably positive on a 97% game and clearly negative on a 95% one. Where the return-to-player figure comes from, and why it says nothing about a single session, is covered in our guide to RTP and volatility.

Worked examples at several caps

Take a 100 euro bonus with a bonus-only requirement, cleared on a 96% game. The expected cost is 4% of turnover in every row:

• 10× — turnover 1,000 · cost 40 · expected value +60 euro
• 15× — turnover 1,500 · cost 60 · expected value +40 euro
• 20× — turnover 2,000 · cost 80 · expected value +20 euro
• 25× — turnover 2,500 · cost 100 · expected value 0 euro (break-even)
• 30× — turnover 3,000 · cost 120 · expected value −20 euro
• 35× — turnover 3,500 · cost 140 · expected value −40 euro
• 45× — turnover 4,500 · cost 180 · expected value −80 euro
• 60× — turnover 6,000 · cost 240 · expected value −140 euro

Now the same bonus with a 100 euro deposit and a deposit-plus-bonus base, so every turnover figure doubles:

• 10× — turnover 2,000 · cost 80 · expected value +20 euro
• 12.5× — turnover 2,500 · cost 100 · expected value 0 euro (break-even)
• 20× — turnover 4,000 · cost 160 · expected value −60 euro
• 35× — turnover 7,000 · cost 280 · expected value −180 euro

The commonly advertised range sits above the break-even line in both tables, which is the honest headline: most welcome offers are negative expected value, by design, and the sensible reason to take one is that you intended to play anyway. The wagering calculator will produce the turnover figure for any set of terms; the cost column is that figure times the house edge.

Game weighting: why a 20% game can still be cheaper

Contribution rates look like a penalty and are usually described as one. The arithmetic is more interesting than that.

If a game contributes at rate w, then each unit wagered credits only w units toward the requirement, so the real money you must wager to credit turnover T is T / w. The expected cost of clearing is therefore:

cost = h × T / w

Take the 35 times example: 3,500 euro of credited turnover on a 100 euro bonus.

• Slots at 100% weighting, h = 4%: real turnover 3,500, cost 3,500 × 0.04 = 140 euro
• Blackjack at 20% weighting, h = 0.5%: real turnover 3,500 / 0.2 = 17,500, cost 17,500 × 0.005 = 87.50 euro

The blackjack route requires five times as much money through the table and still costs 37% less, because the edge is eight times smaller. The five-times weighting penalty does not come close to cancelling an eight-times edge advantage.

The general result is clean. Two games are equally expensive to clear on when:

h₁ / w₁ = h₂ / w₂

so a 0.5% game breaks even against a 4% game at a weighting of 0.005 / 0.04 = 12.5%. Any contribution rate above 12.5% makes the low-edge game the cheaper way to clear. Below it, the slot wins.

Two cautions before acting on that. First, many operators exclude low-edge table games from bonus clearing entirely rather than weighting them, so check whether the game contributes at all. Second, low-edge play against a maximum-stake rule takes a very long time in real hours, and the expiry window is a hard constraint. The arithmetic says blackjack is cheaper; the clock may say it is impossible. Live tables and their contribution treatment are compared on our live casino page.

Maximum conversion turns a good offer into a capped one

A maximum conversion clause limits how much of a bonus, or of the winnings from it, can become withdrawable cash. In the model above it replaces B with min(B, C), while leaving h × T completely unchanged. You pay the same to clear and you can take less away.

The effect is severe on exactly the offers that looked good:

• 10× with no cap: 100 − 40 = +60 euro
• 10× capped at 50 euro: 50 − 40 = +10 euro
• 20× capped at 100 euro: 100 − 80 = +20 euro
• 20× capped at 50 euro: 50 − 80 = −30 euro

A cap below the bonus amount is the clause to look for, because it is the one that flips a positive offer negative without touching the multiplier that everyone compares. It appears most often on free-spin offers, where the spins are advertised by count and the conversion cap is what actually determines their value — a point worth carrying into our free spins comparison. Offers with no wagering requirement at all avoid the whole calculation and are listed on our no-wagering page.

A ninety-second procedure for any offer

1. Find B and the wagering base. Compute T = W × B or W × (D + B).
2. Find the return to player of the game you will actually clear on, and compute h = 1 − RTP.
3. Compute h × T. Compare it against B. If h × T is larger, the offer costs you money.
4. If you plan to clear on a weighted game, use h × T / w instead, and check the game is eligible at all.
5. Find the maximum conversion. Replace B with min(B, C) and redo step three.
6. Check the expiry against the number of hours the turnover realistically takes, and the maximum stake permitted while the bonus is live.

Why the same operator's answer differs depending on where you registered is a separate question, covered in our guide to why bonus terms differ between markets.

One last framing. Every number on this page is an expectation, not a forecast. A negative-expected-value bonus can and often does pay out; a positive one frequently does not. The arithmetic tells you which side of the line you are playing on over many offers, not what happens on this one. If the maths is being used to justify a deposit you would not otherwise make, the tools on our responsible gambling page are the more useful thing on this site.

FAQ

Is a lower wagering multiplier always better?

Not on its own, because the multiplier means nothing without its base. A 20 times requirement on deposit plus bonus is 40 times the bonus on a 100% match, which is worse than a 35 times bonus-only requirement. Compare turnover per unit of bonus, never the raw multiplier.

Why does the break-even multiplier not depend on the bonus size?

Because both sides of the inequality scale with the bonus. Turnover is proportional to B, so the cost h × W × B is proportional to B as well, and B cancels out. What survives is W = 1/h, which depends only on the game.

Should I clear a bonus on blackjack if it only contributes 20%?

Often yes, on cost. A 0.5% edge at 20% weighting costs 2.5% of credited turnover, against 4% for a full-weighted slot. Check first that the game contributes at all rather than being excluded, and that the expiry window allows the far larger real turnover involved.

What does a maximum conversion cap actually do to the value?

It replaces the bonus amount with the cap in the calculation while leaving the clearing cost untouched. A cap set below the bonus amount is the clause most likely to turn an otherwise positive offer negative, and it is rarely mentioned in the headline.