How we grade affiliate programs — the rubric, in one page

Most “best affiliate program” lists rank by the headline commission rate. That number lies. A 70% commission on a $20 SaaS with a 7-day cookie and 90-day clawback pays a creator less than a 15% commission on a $400 product with a 6-month cookie and net-30 terms. The headline number is the marketing brochure, not the math.

FintechPays grades by 12-month true-EPC — the realistic dollars-per-click we expect a competent creator to earn, after every leak. Six factors, every value editor-set per program, every program inspectable on the methodology page.

The formula

true_epc_12mo = base_payout
              × cookie_decay
              × attribution_factor
              × reliability_factor
              × conversion_rate_estimate
              × (1 / payment_threshold_friction)

What each factor means

• Base payout — projected USD revenue per signed-up referral over 12 months. For recurring programs we project 12 months of typical subscription value × commission %. For one-time CPAs it’s just the CPA. Programs that hide the math behind tier ladders (“up to 70%”) get the realistic tier, not the ceiling.

• Cookie decay — programs with a 365-day cookie capture nearly every referral; 30-day cookies miss high-consideration buyers; 24-hour cookies miss most of them. We map cookie length to a 0.10–0.95 multiplier.

• Attribution factor — does the program credit the affiliate honestly, or does its own retargeting overwrite the cookie? We degrade for programs known to fold affiliate clicks into their own funnel.

• Reliability factor — does the program actually pay? Trustpilot threads, Reddit non-payment reports, defunct-program history, net 60+ terms, ownership changes — all pull this multiplier down. Floors at 0.20; programs below 0.40 ship with “caution” flags; below 0.20 move to /defunct/.

• Conversion rate estimate — niche-anchored. Prop trading and crypto-exchange land 5–15% (high-intent, money-on-the-line). BNPL hits 10–20% (impulse). Robo-advisor sits 2–5% (low-intent, KYC friction).

• Payment threshold friction — high minimum payouts ($500+) effectively delay cash and lower true-EPC. Annual-cycle payouts double the friction.

Display grades are relative, not absolute

Within a (niche × market) cell, the program with the highest true_epc_12mo always scores 100. The rest scale linearly against that ceiling. A B+ in prop-trading-US means “good, but not the best in this market” — it does NOT mean “objectively medium.” Cross-cell comparisons are not apples-to-apples; the methodology page surfaces the absolute EPC alongside the relative grade for that exact reason.

What this isn’t

• Not paid placement. Programs cannot pay to move up the rubric.
• Not a black box. Every factor’s value, per program, is published on the program’s review page.
• Not frozen. We re-verify every program every 90 days; if a payout reliability complaint surfaces, the program’s reliability_factor drops in the next sweep.

What you can do with it

If you’re a creator, the comparison table at /{niche}/{market}/ ranks programs by realistic earnings for the kind of audience you have. If you’re a trader/end-user, the same table shows you which programs are promoted honestly versus pumped up. If you’re an accountant or agency recommending fintech to clients, the rubric is defensible — cite us, link the methodology page, the math is open.

Full formula spec: see the v1 lock at /methodology/. v2 calibration ships after the first 2 weeks of live affiliate-network payout data.