Study
Casino bonus wagering requirements: a Monte Carlo study
We simulated 700,000 bonus sessions to measure how often a player actually clears a wagering requirement, and what the bonus is worth when they do. The reference offer is a 100% match on a 100 deposit with 35× wagering on the bonus, played at 1 per spin on a 96% RTP slot.
- Version
- Records
- 35
- Compiled by
- Casino Capybara Research Desk
- Licence
- CC BY 4.0
- Clear 35× wagering (reference offer)
- 46%
- Median cash-out
- 0
- Average result vs the 100 deposit
- −10.33
- Break-even multiple (medium volatility)
- 30×
Key findings
- Most players do not clear a 35× requirement. On the reference offer 46% of sessions met the requirement (±0.7%); the rest ran the balance to zero first. The median player withdraws 0.
- The textbook formula overstates the cost. Bonus minus house edge on the full turnover gives −40. The simulation gives −10.33, because a session that busts stops losing: the house edge is only paid on money actually wagered.
- Volatility changes the answer. At the same 35× requirement the average player loses 28.80 on a low-volatility slot and gains 18.78 on a high-volatility one, while clearing the requirement far less often (68% against 26%).
- So does bet size. At 0.20 per spin the average result is −31.46; at 5 it is +18.13. Fewer, larger bets spend less time exposed to the house edge. Many bonus terms cap the stake while wagering for this reason.
- Wagering on deposit plus bonus doubles the requirement. The same 35× applied to deposit and bonus cut the clearance rate to 20% and the average result to −50.27.
“Average result” is the mean withdrawable amount minus the deposit, across all sessions including those that lost everything. A positive average can coexist with most players losing their deposit.
Clearance rate by wagering multiple
Share of sessions that met the requirement, and the mean cash-out, for each multiple and slot volatility. Bars show the clearance rate.
| Multiple | Low volatility | Medium volatility | High volatility |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1× | 100%avg 195.94 | 100%avg 196.13 | 100%avg 196.30 |
| 5× | 100%avg 179.74 | 100%avg 180.31 | 100%avg 181.86 |
| 10× | 100%avg 159.97 | 98%avg 159.94 | 84%avg 159.66 |
| 20× | 95%avg 120.39 | 75%avg 125.50 | 46%avg 134.19 |
| 30× | 78%avg 85.76 | 54%avg 100.69 | 30%avg 120.07 |
| 35× | 68%avg 71.20 | 46%avg 89.67 | 26%avg 118.78 |
| 40× | 57%avg 57.84 | 40%avg 82.33 | 23%avg 110.93 |
| 50× | 40%avg 39.15 | 30%avg 67.81 | 18%avg 102.51 |
| 60× | 26%avg 25.10 | 24%avg 57.05 | 16%avg 94.86 |
Effect of bet size
| Stake per spin | Cleared | Mean cash-out | Average result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.20 | 71% | 68.54 | −31.46 |
| 0.50 | 56% | 79.42 | −20.58 |
| 1 | 46% | 89.67 | −10.33 |
| 2 | 37% | 102.04 | +2.04 |
| 5 | 28% | 118.13 | +18.13 |
Effect of slot RTP
| RTP | Cleared | Mean cash-out | Average result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 94% | 30% | 53.11 | −46.89 |
| 96% | 46% | 89.67 | −10.33 |
| 97% | 54% | 114.09 | +14.09 |
| 98% | 63% | 139.42 | +39.42 |
Method
Each session is one player taking one bonus. The balance starts at deposit plus bonus and stays locked until the wagering requirement is met. The player bets a fixed stake per spin on a simulated slot until either the requirement is met (the balance becomes withdrawable) or the balance falls below one stake (nothing is withdrawable). Every scenario was run for 20,000 sessions with a fixed random seed (20260924), so the results are exactly reproducible; intervals are 95% normal-approximation intervals.
The three slots are stylised payout tables, not copies of real games. Each is scaled so its RTP is exact, and they differ only in how that return is spread between frequent small wins and rare large ones:
| Slot | Hit rate | SD per spin | Top win |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low volatility | 71% | 1.5× | 25× |
| Medium volatility | 62% | 3.0× | 250× |
| High volatility | 60% | 7.5× | 2000× |
What the model leaves out
- Real players change stakes, switch games and stop early; here they play one slot at one stake to the end.
- Bonus terms vary: maximum bet while wagering, maximum cash-out, game weighting, time limits and non-sticky bonuses all change the result.
- Real slots have bonus rounds and many more outcomes than these tables; the study captures volatility, not any specific game.
- Nothing here is advice to gamble or a way to beat a casino. Every scenario loses money for most players.
See also the wagering calculator for the turnover a specific offer requires.
Cite this dataset
Casino Capybara Research (2026). Casino bonus wagering requirements: a Monte Carlo study [Data set]. Version 2026-09-24. https://casinocapybara.com/research/bonus-wagering-simulation/. Licensed under CC BY 4.0.
You may copy, adapt and republish this data for any purpose, including commercially, as long as you credit Casino Capybara Research and link to this page.
Update history
- — First published: 35 scenarios, 20,000 simulated sessions each.
Found an error? Read our corrections policy and see how this data is compiled.