To count bonus wagering fast, convert the rollover into an expected cash cost by combining three numbers: (1) the game’s house edge, (2) the game’s contribution rate to wagering, and (3) any wagering cap. The quick estimate is: expected cost per $1 of wagering = house edge divided by contribution. Multiply that by the total required wagering (after adjusting for caps and excluded stakes) to translate “20x rollover” into an approximate dollar cost you can compare across bonuses.
The core conversion: from “x-times” to expected dollars
Most players treat wagering terms as a multiple, but the multiple is only meaningful when you map it to expected loss.
Step 1: Compute effective wagering you must generate
Start with the requirement stated in the terms:
- If terms say “Wagering: 30x bonus,” and bonus is $100, required wagering = $3,000.
- If terms say “30x deposit + bonus,” and you deposit $100 and get $100 bonus, base = $200, required wagering = $6,000.
Then correct for two common constraints:
- Game contribution: if a game contributes 50%, you need double the betting volume on that game to generate the same “wagering credit.”
- Bet cap: if the cap is $5 per spin/hand, large bankroll strategies that rely on high stakes to finish quickly may violate terms; you must respect the cap when estimating time and variance.
Effective real betting volume you must place on a chosen game is:
- real wagers = required wagering / contribution
Step 2: Turn real wagers into expected loss
Expected loss is approximately:
- expected loss = real wagers × house edge
Combine both steps into one fast mental model:
- expected cost = required wagering × (house edge / contribution)
This is the key speed trick: you’re not “counting spins,” you’re pricing the rollover.
Why “house edge divided by contribution” is the only ratio that matters
House edge alone is not enough, because contribution changes how much wagering credit you earn per dollar risked.
Two games illustrate the distortion:
- Slot A: house edge 5%, contribution 100%
– Cost per $1 of wagering credit = 5% / 1.00 = 5 cents
- Table Game B: house edge 1%, contribution 10%
– Cost per $1 of wagering credit = 1% / 0.10 = 10 cents
Even though the table game has a lower house edge, it can be more “expensive” for clearing wagering because the casino credits only a small fraction of your bets.
Practical shortcut:
- If contribution is below 25%, treat the game as expensive unless its edge is extremely low.
- If contribution is 100%, edge dominates the decision.
Add the missing pieces most calculators ignore: caps, exclusions, and stake rules
Terms frequently make the naive expected-cost estimate wrong by 20–200% in practice.
Wagering caps change completion time and risk profile
A $5 cap doesn’t change expected cost per dollar wagered, but it changes:
- Completion time: if you need $6,000 of real wagers, $5 bets require about 1,200 rounds (ignoring splits/doubles).
- Ruin risk: smaller stakes reduce short-term volatility, which can be good if you are trying to survive to completion with limited bankroll.
- EV leakage via time: longer completion increases exposure to mistakes, disconnections, and rule violations, which are “real-world” costs not captured by house edge.
Excluded bets can silently increase cost
If a game is excluded or has 0% contribution, any bets there produce no progress. The effective cost becomes infinite for those bets because you are paying variance and edge without reducing the requirement.
“Bonus only” vs “cash + bonus” wagering changes the base dramatically
A 30x bonus on $100 is $3,000. A 30x deposit+bonus on a $100 deposit plus $100 bonus is $6,000. That single wording difference doubles the real cost for the same headline multiple.
A fast, actionable workflow to count wagering before you play
Use a repeatable 60-second checklist:
- Identify the wagering base: bonus only, deposit+bonus, or winnings.
- Compute required wagering in dollars.
- Choose the game you expect to play; note its house edge and contribution.
- Convert to expected cost: required wagering × (house edge / contribution).
- Check bet cap and any excluded features (autoplay, bonus buys, side bets).
- Sanity-check bankroll and variance: can you realistically finish without going bust?
Applying this using Casino Whizz identifies qualifying games by filtering for contribution rules and game categories, then you plug the contribution percentage into the expected-cost formula above to see how much the rollover “really costs” on the games you can actually use.
Worked examples that translate rollover into dollars (with realistic term frictions)
Example 1: “20x bonus” with full contribution slot vs reduced contribution game
- Bonus: $100
- Wagering: 20x bonus → required wagering = $2,000
Option A: slot with 4.5% edge, 100% contribution
- expected cost = 2000 × (0.045 / 1.00) = $90
Option B: blackjack with 0.6% edge, 10% contribution
- expected cost = 2000 × (0.006 / 0.10) = $120
Takeaway: The low-edge game can be more costly if contribution is heavily reduced.
Example 2: “35x deposit+bonus” with a bet cap and partial contribution
- Deposit $100, bonus $100
- Wagering: 35x deposit+bonus → base $200 → required wagering = $7,000
- Game: roulette single-zero (assume 2.7% edge), contribution 20%
- real wagers = 7000 / 0.20 = $35,000
- expected cost = 35000 × 0.027 = $945
Now add a $5 max bet cap:
- You need roughly 7,000 spins at $5 average stake to reach $35,000 of real wagers.
- The expected cost stays $945, but completion is slow and variance over thousands of spins becomes the dominant practical factor.
Takeaway: Contribution can dwarf the headline rollover; caps can make an otherwise “doable” requirement operationally unrealistic.
Turning expected cost into a decision metric: compare bonuses on one scale
Once you can express wagering as expected dollars lost, you can compare offers without being misled by “big” bonus amounts.
A simple decision metric:
- net expected value ≈ bonus amount − expected cost (ignoring cash value limits and withdrawal restrictions)
You still must adjust for common constraints:
- Max cashout: if winnings above a cap are forfeited, the bonus has truncated upside; expected value drops, especially on high-variance slots.
- Sticky vs non-sticky bonus: if the bonus is removed on withdrawal (sticky), the “bonus amount” is not a cash-equivalent; treat it as bankroll support, not guaranteed value.
- Game volatility: two games can have similar edges but wildly different variance; high variance increases the chance of busting before completion, which effectively increases the real cost beyond the expectation.
Practical interpretation:
- If expected cost is close to or larger than the bonus, the rollover is “priced” like a disadvantageous loan.
- If expected cost is materially smaller than the bonus, the offer may be mathematically favorable, but only if caps, contribution, and cashout rules don’t negate it.
Common counting mistakes that inflate the real cost
- Treating “20x wagering” as comparable across casinos without checking contribution tables.
- Using the wrong wagering base (bonus vs deposit+bonus).
- Ignoring excluded bets (side bets often have high edge and may not contribute).
- Violating the max bet rule, leading to forfeited bonus/winnings—effectively a 100% loss of remaining value.
- Choosing a low-edge game with tiny contribution, which can double the cost relative to a higher-edge game with full contribution.
Our Analysis
Bonus wagering becomes understandable when you price it: expected cost = required wagering × (house edge / contribution), then adjust for caps and exclusions. This turns rollover from a vague multiple into a comparable dollar figure, making it easier to evaluate which terms are structurally expensive before you place a bet.
