Bonus Value Calculator

Leave Bonus Amount at $200, Wagering at 30×, and Game RTP at 96%. Calculate. Bonus EV is −$40.00 and Wagering Required is $6,000.00. The playthrough-on-bonus-only model says you must cycle 30 × 200 = $6,000 through a 96% game before the bonus converts to cash. On that $6,000 the game keeps 4%, which is $240 of expected loss, so the $200 voucher is worth 200 − 240 = −$40 in expectation. A minus number means the wagering tax exceeds the face value; walking away from the bonus is the higher-EV choice under this model.

Change RTP to 99.5% (a 9/6 video-poker game, if the terms allow it). Required stays $6,000. EV becomes 200 − 6000 × 0.005 = 200 − 30 = +$170.00. That is why terms that ban video poker, blackjack, and baccarat exist: the operator is selling you a 96% slot playthrough, not a 99.5% one. If the contribution weight is 10% on video poker, you would need ten times the handle, which this calculator does not apply; type an effective RTP or an inflated wagering multiple yourself to mimic a 10% contribution.

Wagering 40× on the same $200 and 96% game: required $8,000, EV = 200 − 8000×0.04 = 200 − 320 = −$120. Wagering 10×: required $2,000, EV = 200 − 80 = +$120. The face value of the bonus does not change; the tax does. Always read whether the multiple applies to bonus only (this model) or to deposit-plus-bonus (a 30× on a $200 match of a $200 deposit is 30×400 = $12,000 of handle, twice the default, EV = 200 − 480 = −$280 if you treat only the bonus as the prize).

Game RTP should be the game you will actually play to clear, after any weighting. A 96% headline slot that weights 100% is 96. A 99.5% game at 20% contribution is economically a 0.995 × 0.20 + 1 × 0.80 wait — no: contribution stretches wagering, it does not mix RTP with 100%. If only 20% of each video-poker dollar counts, you need 5× the handle, equivalent to raising wagering from 30 to 150 on that game. Put 150 in Wagering and 99.5 in RTP rather than inventing a blended RTP.

The output is expectation, not a clearing-time forecast. Variance of a 96% slot on $6,000 of handle can bust the bonus balance to zero long before $6,000 is cycled, which realises a −$200 outcome worse than the −$40 mean. Max-bet caps and 24-hour time limits are outside the engine.

A casino bonus is a contingent claim: the operator credits $200 (or some other face) that becomes withdrawable only after a wagering requirement is met, usually expressed as a multiple of the bonus or of deposit-plus-bonus, on a permitted game list, within a time window, with a max-bet cap. The honest question is whether the claim's expected value after the playthrough tax is positive. This calculator answers that question under the simplest widely used model: playthrough applies to the bonus only, the game has a constant RTP, there is no bust, and consolation of the original deposit is ignored.

The model is standard in the "bonus hunting" arithmetic that grew up with online casinos in the 2000s. It is also the model that terms and conditions are written to defeat. Game weighting, excluded titles, max cash-out caps (a $200 bonus that can only withdraw $500 even if you run it up), and sticky-bonus constructions that forfeit the remaining bonus on first withdrawal all sit outside the formula EV = B − (B×w)×(1 − RTP). A sticky bonus where you never receive B as cash, only the winnings after playthrough, is a different claim and usually worth less.

History of the 30× default: early-2010s European and Caribbean licences commonly posted 20×–35× on bonus only for slots. Table-game contribution of 0–10% was already the norm, which is why a 1.06% baccarat edge looks attractive until you discover that $1 of baccarat counts as $0.00 or $0.10 toward the $6,000. Portuguese, Spanish, and Danish regulated sites now tend to publish contribution tables in the bonus T&Cs; read them before you type 96%.

What a positive EV does not mean: a free lunch without variance, a legal obligation on the operator to let you clear on a 99.5% game they listed by accident, or a bankroll requirement of only $200. Clearing $6,000 of 96% slots with a $200 starting bonus typically needs a several-hundred-dollar cash buffer so a downswing does not hit zero. The −$40 default EV already assumes you survive to the end of the handle. Bust risk makes the true EV more negative.

Limits: bonus-only wagering, constant RTP, no max cash-out, no sticky vs withdrawable distinction, no deposit EV, no insurance or reload quirks. If the multiple is on deposit-plus-bonus, double the Wagering field when deposit equals bonus, or multiply by (deposit+bonus)/bonus in general.

A casino bonus is a contingent claim: face value that becomes withdrawable only after a wagering requirement is met. The honest question is whether that claim’s expected value after the playthrough tax is positive. The simplest widely used model, the one this worksheet implements in arithmetic rather than in simulation, applies playthrough to the bonus only, assumes a constant return to player, ignores bust, and ignores consolation of the original deposit. Let B be the bonus face, w the wagering multiple, and r the return to player in percent. Required handle is B times w. Expected value is B minus required times (1 − r/100).

The published defaults are a bonus of 200, wagering of 30 times, and a game return of 96 percent. Required handle is 200 × 30 = 6,000, displayed as 6,000.00. The game keeps 4 percent of that handle, which is 240 of expected loss, so the voucher is worth 200 − 240 = −40, displayed as −40.00. Equivalently, expected value equals 200 times (1 − 30 × 0.04) = 200 times (1 − 1.2) = 200 times (−0.2) = −40. A minus sign means the wagering tax exceeds the face; walking away is the higher-expectation choice under this model. A scaled sibling with face 100, the same 30 times and 96 percent, would require 3,000 and an expected value of −20; the default on the page is the 200 face, not that half-size ticket.

The sign flips when 1 − w(1 − r/100) is positive, that is when return to player exceeds 1 − 1/w. For a 30-times requirement you need return above 1 − 1/30 ≈ 96.667 percent to have non-negative expected value. The 96 percent default sits just below that line, which is why the figure is a modest negative rather than a disaster. For 40 times the threshold is 97.5 percent. For 10 times it is 90 percent. That threshold is the entire strategic content of the model. Change return to 99.5 percent, a 9/6 video-poker game if the terms allow it: required stays 6,000, expected value becomes 200 − 6,000 × 0.005 = 200 − 30 = +170. That is why terms ban video poker, blackjack, and baccarat, or weight them at 10 percent.

Assumptions are where bonus hunting dies. Game weighting, excluded titles, max-bet caps, max cash-out caps, sticky constructions that forfeit remaining bonus on first withdrawal, and time windows are all outside the identity. If video poker contributes 10 percent, you need ten times the handle unless you inflate w by ten instead. Bust before completing playthrough can dominate when B is large relative to the deposit; this model has no ruin term. Huygens’s expectation is still the right language: you are summing prize times probability under a constant leak. The worksheet reports required handle and expected value. It does not simulate a slot, and it does not advise claiming or declining a promotion.