The Playthrough Clearing Simulator: Can You Finish the Wagering?

What an offer is worth and whether you can realistically finish its wagering requirement are two different questions. This answers the second one, and it deliberately does not touch the first.

Every run is driven by a seeded generator, so the same seed and the same number of attempts reproduce the same figures exactly. Change the seed to see a different sample of the same underlying distribution.

What the simulation is actually doing

Each attempt starts with your deposit plus the bonus and plays repeated bets at roughly one percent of that starting balance, capped by any maximum bet the terms impose. Every round charges the house edge, exactly as it would in practice. The attempt ends in one of three ways: the required turnover is reached, the balance falls below the minimum stake, or the round budget representing the expiry window runs out.

Repeating that thousands of times gives the proportion of attempts that finish. It is not a prediction about you, and nothing here can be. It is a reliable description of how a requirement of that size behaves against a bankroll of that size, which is the question a single anecdote cannot answer.

The two failure modes are separate

Running out of money and running out of time are different problems with different fixes, and a single failure rate would hide which one you face. A large requirement against a small bankroll fails through bust: the balance simply does not survive long enough. A large requirement against a short window with a low maximum bet fails through time: the balance might well hold, but there are not enough rounds available to build the turnover.

Operators frequently impose a maximum bet precisely while bonus funds are live, and that term converts a bankroll problem into a scheduling one. It rarely appears in the advertisement and it can make an otherwise reasonable promotion impossible to complete in the days allowed.

Why this figure is published separately from Real Value

The clearing cost inside Real Value assumes the whole turnover was played. Someone who busts early never pays all of it, so multiplying the value by a probability of success would charge them twice for the same failure.

There is a deeper reason too. Expected value and the spread of outcomes are different properties of the same bet. How you stake reshapes the spread. It changes how often you go broke, and how wild the swings are, and it cannot change the expectation at all. Presenting one number that mixes them would obscure exactly the distinction a reader needs.

So: Real Value tells you what the offer is worth. This tells you how often a requirement of this size gets finished. Neither describes a way to come out ahead of the operator, and the house edge is charged on every simulated round here just as it would be in practice.

Why the average is more useful than any single run

Any individual attempt tells you nothing. Someone finishes a hostile requirement on a lucky streak and concludes it was achievable; someone else busts a generous one early and concludes it was rigged. Both conclusions are drawn from a sample of one, and both are wrong in the same way. The proportion across thousands of attempts is the only figure that describes the requirement rather than the anecdote.

That is also why the seed is published beside every figure taken from this tool. A result nobody can reproduce is an assertion; a result anyone can reproduce by entering the same numbers is a measurement, and the difference matters more here than anywhere else on the site.

What the numbers do not account for

The simulation plays one game at one stake for the whole requirement, which no real session does. Moving between games with different volatility changes the shape of the outcomes without changing their expectation, so the clearing probability shown here is a reasonable central estimate rather than a precise forecast for a particular way of playing.

It also assumes you keep going until one of the three endings arrives. Real players stop for reasons the model cannot see: running out of evening, losing interest, deciding the pursuit is not worth it. Every one of those is a fourth ending, and in practice it is a common one.

What the max bet field does

Many operators cap the stake you may place while bonus funds are live. A low cap does not change what the offer is worth, but it lengthens the grind: the same turnover has to be built from smaller bets, which takes more rounds and gives the balance more chances to run out before the requirement is met. Set it to zero when the terms publish no cap.

Simulator questions