Same offer, two channels: search players showed 2.3× the 180-day LTV of paid-social players

Same offer, two channels: search players showed 2.3× the 180-day LTV of paid-social players

Operator cohort: 6,100 depositors on one casino brand, split by acquisition source, tracked 180 days.

LTV here = cumulative NGR per player over the window.

— Search/SEO referrals: 180-day LTV $418, churn cohort (players gone-dark by day 90) 51%.
— Paid social: 180-day LTV $182, day-90 churn 68%.

The gap isn't first-deposit size — those were close, $61 vs $57. It's repeat behavior: search players averaged 7.8 deposits over 180 days, social players 3.1.

Why it matters for deal structure: on a 25% RevShare deal, the search cohort returned $104.50 NGR-share/player vs $45.50 for social. A buyer paying the same CPA for both is silently overpaying for social by ~2.3×.

The operator's fix: tiered CPA by source — they now pay search-sourced traffic $145 and social $95, and both clear the same internal payback period (~day 70).

Benchmark of the day: if your LTV spread by channel exceeds ~1.8×, a single blended CPA is leaving margin on the table — price per channel.