Guide
Introducing broker vs affiliate: which model actually pays more?
Both models put a link in front of the same trader. They differ in what has to happen next before you are paid, and that is the whole comparison.
The two models, stated plainly
Strip away the naming and there are two payment triggers in this industry. Everything else is a variation on one of them.
The affiliate model pays on an event
You are paid when the person you sent does something once: registers, verifies, or funds an account. The payment is a fixed amount, it arrives shortly after the event, and it does not repeat. Whether that trader goes on to trade for two years or closes the account in a fortnight makes no difference to what you receive.
The introducing broker model pays on trading
You are paid a share of what the broker relationship earns while the trader trades. The payment repeats for as long as they keep trading, and it scales with how much they trade rather than with how many people you signed up. Nothing is paid at signup, because nothing has been earned at signup.
The word affiliate is used for both, which is where the confusion starts. A programme calling itself an affiliate programme may be paying on trading, and a programme calling itself an IB programme may be paying a flat amount per funded account. Read the payment trigger, not the label on the page.
Where the money actually comes from
Both models are funded out of the same place, which is why the comparison is arithmetic rather than opinion.
A retail trader pays a spread on every position they open. That spread is the broker's revenue on the account. When a broker pays a partner, whatever the model, the money comes out of that revenue. A one-off payment per funded trader is the broker paying you in advance out of spread it expects to collect. A share of revenue is the broker paying you out of spread it has already collected.
That is why a one-off payment has a clawback and a share of revenue usually does not. Money paid in advance against expected trading has to be recoverable if the trading does not happen. Money paid on trading that already happened has nothing to recover.
The four questions that decide which pays more
Run any two offers through these and the answer usually stops being close.
Step 1 of 4. How long does your average referred trader stay funded?
This is the single biggest lever, and it is the one most partners have never measured. A short average life favours a one-off payment. A long one favours a share of revenue, and the crossover is usually earlier than people expect.
Step 2 of 4. How much do they trade while they are there?
A one-off payment is flat across a trader who trades once and a trader who trades daily. A share of revenue is not. If your audience is active rather than curious, the flat payment is leaving the difference on the table.
Step 3 of 4. What is the clawback, and what triggers it?
A headline number with a clawback attached is not the number. Ask what window it runs for, what event starts the clock, and whether it applies to the whole payment or part of it.
Step 4 of 4. How is the trader attributed to you, and for how long?
A programme that attributes on a browser cookie loses conversions it never tells you about. One that attributes server side, on an identifier stamped at the click and matched at registration, does not. This is invisible in the commission table and it is worth more than several percentage points.
When the affiliate model genuinely wins
It does win, on a specific traffic profile, and a comparison that pretends otherwise is not worth reading.
One-off payments win on traffic that converts once and does not persist. Paid media pointed at a broad audience, incentivised signups, and campaigns where you are buying attention rather than holding it all produce funded accounts with a short average life. In that shape, a fixed amount per funded trader collected quickly beats a share of revenue that never accumulates, and it beats it decisively.
The honest way to see this is a churn input. Model the same cohort at a high monthly churn rate and at a low one, and watch the crossover month move. If your churn is genuinely high, take the one-off payment. Any programme that hides churn behind a chart with no churn control is showing you the answer it wants.
- Buying broad paid traffic with no ongoing relationship to the trader
- Campaigns measured and closed inside a quarter, where a two year tail has no budget value
- An audience you cannot contact again after the signup
When the introducing broker model wins
It wins wherever the relationship continues after the signup. A community, a signal group, an education business or a desk with a client list all have something the paid-media buyer does not: a reason for the trader to still be there in six months, and a channel to keep them engaged. Every month that trader stays active is a month you are paid again for work you did once.
It also changes what you optimise for. On a one-off payment your incentive ends at the funded account. On a share of revenue your incentive is the same as the trader's ability to keep trading, which means better material, better risk education and fewer blown accounts are all directly worth money to you.
- What Introbroker pays on the introducing broker modelOf what Introbroker receives on the account
- 50% to 85%
- What triggers the paymentTrading, not signup
- Lifetime. It does not expire while the trader keeps trading.
- Clawback
- None
- Payout schedule
- Weekly, Monday 08:00 CEST
You do not have to pick one
A hybrid deal takes a smaller one-off payment per funded client and a smaller continuing share, which suits a partner with a mix of both traffic types or one who needs some of the money to arrive early enough to fund the next campaign. It costs you at the top end: the continuing share is materially smaller than the revenue-share rate you would otherwise be on, and the front end carries a clawback the revenue-share model does not have.
The point is that the choice is a cash flow decision as much as a total earnings decision, and those two do not always point the same way.
- Hybrid terms
- $100 per funded client plus 25%
- Hybrid clawback
- 30 days on the front end
- CPA ceiling
- Up to $650 per funded trader
- CPA clawback
- 30 days
Questions
Which model pays more over a year?
It depends on how long your referred traders stay funded and how much they trade. On traffic that persists, a share of revenue overtakes a one-off payment during the first year and then keeps accumulating. On traffic that converts once and churns quickly, the one-off payment wins outright. The deciding input is your own churn rate, which is why the calculator on this site makes churn a visible control rather than a hidden constant.
Is an introducing broker just an affiliate with a longer cookie?
No. The difference is what is being measured. An affiliate programme records that a conversion happened. An introducing broker programme records every closed trade, which is what makes it possible to compute a share of revenue rather than accept a number someone else calculated. Attribution length is a consequence of that, not the difference itself.
Can I move from one model to the other later?
With Introbroker, yes. The model is a term in your partner agreement, not a property of your tracking links, so changing it does not cost you your attribution or your existing traders. Traders already attributed to you stay attributed to you.
Can I run different models on different traffic?
That is what sub-IDs are for. The links carry up to five of them, so you can separate paid traffic from community traffic and see which shape each one actually produces before deciding what to ask for at your next terms review.
Where this comes from
Sources
Primary sources only: the regulator, the standards body, the platform vendor, the legislation, or our own agreements. Not another affiliate's summary of one.
- Our own documentIntrobroker
Introbroker partner agreementnot published
The commercial terms on this page in their contractual form: the rate, the denominator, the clawback position and the payout schedule. Sent before you sign.
- RegulatorFinancial Conduct Authority
Conduct of Business Sourcebook, COBS
What a firm communicating a financial promotion has to say, and how an inducement paid to an introducer is treated.
- Our own documentIntrobroker, from each broker
Broker revenue statements and rebate reportsnot published
The per-broker figures the commission ledger reconciles against. Two of these do not currently reconcile with each other, which is why no page on this site publishes a per-lot figure.