FTD count is a vanity metric — NGR/FTD is the one that pays

FTD count is a vanity metric — NGR/FTD is the one that pays

The advice: optimize for first-time deposits, more FTDs = more money. FTD is the easiest number to game and the weakest predictor of revenue.

Why, across ~40 RevShare cohorts:
— Two sources delivered identical 500 FTDs each in a month.
— Source A: NGR/FTD of $95. Source B: NGR/FTD of $310.
— Same FTD count, 3.3x the actual revenue. The difference was deposit size and retention depth, invisible at the FTD layer.

The correction: FTD is a throughput metric, not a value metric. On RevShare it tells you almost nothing; a wall of $20 minimum-deposit, one-and-done players inflates FTD while NGR stays flat. Optimize sources by NGR-per-FTD and month-2 retention, then scale the high-value source even if it produces fewer raw FTDs.

On CPA, FTD matters more — but only after the qualification gate, which is a different number than gross FTD.

Benchmark of the day: track NGR/FTD, not FTD; a 3x spread on identical FTD volume is normal between sources.