Showing an operator a 47% second-deposit rate won a 22% CPA bump at the same volume

Showing an operator a 47% second-deposit rate won a 22% CPA bump at the same volume

Affiliate-side case: one sportsbook deal renegotiated using the affiliate's own quality data, tracked over the prior 120 days.

Most affiliates negotiate on volume. This one negotiated on quality, with receipts.

The data brought to the table, on ~3,300 delivered depositors:
— Second-deposit rate 47% vs the operator's house average of 31%.
— 90-day NGR/player $244 vs the operator's blended $186.
— Chargeback rate 0.8% vs house 2.1%.

Translation for the operator: this traffic was worth ~31% more NGR per player than their average source, at a third of the fraud cost.

The ask and result: CPA $155 → $189 (+22%) at the same volume cap, justified because the operator's own payback model still cleared at the higher price given the superior LTV.

The leverage wasn't the volume — it was proving the cohort's downstream value the operator couldn't see on their side until aggregated.

Benchmark of the day: if your second-deposit rate beats the operator's house average by 10+ points, you have a quantified case for a 15–25% CPA premium — bring the cohort data, not the volume.