RTP calculator: expected return and cost from turnover
Short answer
For fixed turnover T and RTP R%, expected return is T × R / 100 and expected cost is T × (1 − R / 100). These are mathematical averages under the stated model, not guaranteed results or a payout schedule.
The calculator answers a narrow arithmetic question. Its usefulness depends on identifying the game’s applicable percentage and entering total stakes rather than an unexplained deposit amount.
Try it here
Runs in your browserEducational information. No account access, deposits, document collection or prediction of individual outcomes.
Choose the input you mean to measure
Turnover is total stakes, including money staked again. The Gambling Commission’s technical glossary uses that definition; it is a mathematical term here, not an imported Ontario rule. A deposit is a transfer into an account, so it does not establish how much will eventually be staked.
Use a sourced RTP that applies to the relevant game and conditions, or explicitly label it hypothetical. The calculator cannot identify a game configuration from a name. An unknown percentage should stay unknown.
Worked example: C$500 turnover at an assumed 96%
Expected return is C$500 × 0.96 = C$480. Expected cost is C$500 − C$480 = C$20. The return amount is the sum of payouts in the model, not a claim that C$480 will remain in an account after a deposit of C$500.
For the formula, write each stake as s and its modelled expected payout as s × 0.96. Adding the expected payouts across the fixed set of stakes gives 0.96 times their sum. Subtract that from total stakes to obtain the expected cost. This derivation does not create a guarantee for the realised payouts.
Why the same deposit can produce different calculations
Suppose two hypothetical records both begin with a C$100 deposit. One records C$100 in total stakes; the other records C$400 because money is staked again. At a fixed 96% assumption their expected costs are C$4 and C$16 respectively. Using the deposit as turnover would hide the difference.
These are separate fixed-turnover illustrations, not instructions to reach a turnover target. The calculator does not determine whether a particular balance can sustain those stakes or what happens if play stops when funds run out.
A session ratio is a different measurement
For a completed record, total payouts divided by total stakes gives the observed return ratio for that record. The Gambling Commission’s monitoring guidance distinguishes such an observed result from the designed value and notes that sample size and variability matter when interpreting deviations.
In an original example, C$70 of recorded payouts on C$100 of stakes is an observed 70%. Comparing it with an assumed 96% does not, by itself, diagnose a faulty game. Northline does not provide the statistical inputs or audit needed for that conclusion.
What the result leaves unanswered
- The chance of finishing ahead: an average does not specify the full distribution of outcomes.
- The next result or a recovery date: the calculation contains no such prediction.
- A safe spending amount: expected cost is not a limit on possible losses.
- A final account balance: deposits, withdrawals, realised results and other account entries require separate reconciliation.
- A verified game percentage: the source and configuration remain your input assumptions.
Sources & reading
Primary references support the factual context below. Explanations, worked examples and calculations are original Northline analysis. Read how we handle evidence.
- Gambling Commission — RTP, actual return and turnover terminology
Primary technical glossary from Great Britain, used only for mathematical terminology. Not a statement of Ontario requirements or an applicable operator policy. Accessed ; source dated .
- Gambling Commission — observed RTP and interpretation of variation
Primary technical explanation of observed payout-to-turnover ratios and statistical variation. Northline uses its own numerical examples, not the source table; this is not an Ontario compliance test. Accessed .
An editorial review date is not a new policy effective date. Always check the current source for operator-specific conditions.
Suggest a correction