The mechanics are the simplest of any deal type: a qualifying FTD lands, a fixed amount is owed. Ten qualifying FTDs at a 250 CPA pay 2,500, regardless of whether those players go on to wager heavily or never log in again. The affiliate takes no revenue risk on player behavior after the deposit, which makes CPA the natural fit for paid traffic, where media costs are due now and cash flow cannot wait for a RevShare tail to build.
The word doing all the work is "qualifying". Contracts define a minimum deposit, often a minimum wagering requirement, allowed countries, and exclusions for duplicates, self-referrals, and fraud. Many also set a baseline, a minimum number of FTDs per month before any CPA is paid at all, and clawback rights if deposits are reversed. An affiliate counting raw FTDs while the operator counts qualified ones will find the gap at reconciliation, which is why tracking qualification status per player, not just deposit events, is basic hygiene.
Pricing a CPA deal means knowing your economics on both sides. Your side: cost per FTD from each traffic source, so you know your margin per acquisition. The operator's side: they price CPA off expected player lifetime value, so an unusually generous CPA on your traffic often signals they expect retention you are not being paid for. That asymmetry is exactly what hybrid deals exist to split.
Why it matters
CPA gives you certainty and immediate cash at the cost of all future upside. It is the right call when your players churn fast or your capital is tied up in media spend, and the wrong one when your traffic retains for months. The decision should come from your own cohort data on deposits and retention, never from which number looks bigger on day one.
Related