How CPA payment works
Under CPA, the affiliate receives a fixed amount — say, R$ 200 — for each player they referred who hit the qualification criteria set out in the contract. Unlike revenue share, where the affiliate earns a recurring percentage of the NGR that player generates for as long as they stay active, CPA is paid once, usually 15 to 45 days after sign-up — enough time for the player to meet the requirements and for the operator to confirm there was no fraud or chargeback on the deposit.
For the operator, CPA turns a variable, long-term cost into a fixed, predictable cost per player, which makes channel-level CAC easier to calculate, but shifts the risk to the operator if that player never generates enough revenue to cover the upfront fixed payment.
What counts as a "qualified player"?
The qualification clause is the most important part of a CPA contract, because it defines when payment is owed. The most common conditions are:
- Minimum deposit — e.g., R$ 50 on the first deposit.
- Minimum rollover — the deposited amount must be wagered a minimum number of times before it counts as qualified, e.g., 1x the deposit.
- Time window — the player must meet the criteria above within a defined period after registration, typically 30 days.
- Completed KYC — in some contracts, payment is only released once identity verification is approved.
A CPA contract without these criteria spelled out as explicit, measurable numbers is exactly the kind of agreement that generates the most disputes between operator and affiliate — without a defined "minimum deposit" and "minimum rollover," any player who deposits R$ 1 and never bets could, on a literal reading of the contract, count as qualified.
CPA, revenue share or hybrid model
| Model | How it pays | When it pays | Risk for the operator |
|---|---|---|---|
| CPA | Fixed amount per qualified player | Once, after criteria are met | Low per player, but fixed even if the player never generates revenue later |
| Revenue share | Percentage of the NGR the player generates | Recurring, for as long as the player is active | No cost if the player never generates revenue, but cost grows with high-value players |
| Hybrid | Reduced CPA + smaller revenue share percentage | Part at qualification, part recurring | Balances both risks, but requires more complex reconciliation |
Operators with a low FTD CAC and high confidence in an affiliate's traffic quality tend to negotiate CPA. Operators that prefer to tie payment to a player's actual performance over time opt for revenue share or the hybrid model.
The affiliate fraud risk in CPA
CPA pays for volume of qualified players, which creates a direct incentive for fraud when qualification criteria are weak. The most common patterns are: sign-ups with fake or duplicated data (multi-accounting) to inflate the number of referrals; a minimum deposit made only to satisfy the rule, followed by an immediate withdrawal without actually wagering, when minimum rollover isn't properly verified; and incentivized traffic, where an affiliate pays third parties to sign up and deposit the minimum with no intention of continuing to play.
Well-structured CPA contracts mitigate this with a chargeback clause — the operator can reverse payment if the player requests a deposit refund or files a card or PIX chargeback — a holdback period before payment (30 to 60 days), and cross-checking of KYC and device fingerprint to catch duplicate accounts coming from the same affiliate.