So, you’re ready to build an affiliate program for your app but struggling to decide on CPI vs CPA vs RevShare models. You have a great product and a list of potential partners. Now you face one of the most critical strategic decisions you’ll make: how will you compensate them? Your choice of app affiliate payout models will directly impact the quality of users you attract, the types of partners you can recruit, and the overall profitability of your program.
The three most common affiliate commission models are CPI, CPA, and Revenue Share. Each has distinct pros and cons, and the right choice depends entirely on your app’s goals and business model. This guide will break down each option to help you make the right decision when deciding on CPI vs CPA vs RevShare.
The Foundation: Cost Per Install (CPI)
The CPI model is the most straightforward of all the payout structures.
What it is: You pay an affiliate a flat fee for every single app install they generate. If a partner drives 100 installs at a $2 CPI, you pay them $200, regardless of what those users do after installing.
The Action-Oriented Model: Cost Per Action (CPA)
The CPI vs CPA debate is a common one, and for most apps, CPA represents a significant step up in sophistication and effectiveness.
What it is: Instead of paying for an install, you pay when a user completes a specific, valuable action inside your app after installing. This “action” is up to you. Common examples include creating an account, starting a free trial, or making a first in-app purchase.
The True Partnership: Revenue Share (RevShare)
Revenue Share is the gold standard for creating long-term, high-value affiliate partnerships.
What it is: You give an affiliate a percentage of the revenue generated by the users they refer, often for a specific period or for the user’s lifetime.
| Payout Model | Pros for You (The App) | Cons for You (The App) | Affiliate’s Perspective (EPC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CPI (Cost Per Install) | Simple to track; predictable costs. | High risk of low-quality users; misaligned with revenue goals. | Low & Unpredictable EPC. Payout is small and only rewards top-of-funnel actions, making it less attractive for affiliates focused on quality traffic. |
| CPA (Cost Per Action) | Higher user quality; aligns payouts with user activation. | Requires robust in-app event tracking. | Higher & More Predictable EPC. Affiliates are rewarded more for sending high-intent users, making the EPC much higher and more reliable if the app converts well. |
| RevShare (Revenue Share) | Perfectly aligned incentives; no financial risk. | Technically complex; requires flawless long-term tracking. | Highest Potential EPC, but Delayed. Offers the greatest long-term earning potential, but the payout is delayed and depends on the LTV of the user. Highly attractive to top-tier partners. |
How to Choose the Right Model for Your App
There is no single “best” model. To make the right choice, ask yourself these three questions:
- What is my primary goal? Are you chasing user volume and chart rankings (CPI), or are you focused on acquiring engaged, activated users (CPA/RevShare)?
- What is my monetization strategy? If you make money from ads, CPI might work. If you have a subscription or in-app purchases, CPA and RevShare are far more effective.
- How mature is my program? It can be effective to start with a simple CPA model to test the waters and then graduate your top-performing partners to a more lucrative RevShare model.
What Affiliates Look For: A Partner’s Perspective
Understanding the difference between CPI, CPA, and RevShare is only half the battle. To build a successful program, you also need to understand what high-quality affiliates look for when choosing which programs to promote. As seen in discussions across affiliate communities, their decision-making is sophisticated and goes far beyond the headline commission rate.
Here are the key factors top affiliates consider:
- Trust and Reliability: An affiliate’s biggest concern is getting paid correctly and on time. A program with a reputation for unreliable tracking or slow payouts will be avoided, no matter how high the commission. This is why using a transparent, reliable tracking tool like Tapp is critical for building partner trust.
- Conversion Performance: Experienced affiliates care more about Earnings Per Click (EPC) than the commission rate alone. A 50% RevShare offer that never converts is worthless, while a $10 CPA offer that converts 10% of clicks is highly valuable. They will always prioritize a program that proves it can convert traffic effectively.
- Audience Alignment: The best affiliates protect their audience’s trust above all else. They will only promote apps that are a genuine, high-quality fit for their niche. A low-quality app with a high CPI offer is a non-starter for them. Offering a CPA or RevShare model signals that you are confident in your app’s quality and value.
By choosing a CPA or RevShare model, you are sending a clear signal to potential partners that you are interested in a high-quality, performance-based partnership, which is exactly what the best affiliates are looking for.
Conclusion
Your choice between CPI vs CPA vs RevShare will define the direction and success of your affiliate program. For most modern apps, moving beyond the vanity metric of CPI and towards action-oriented models like CPA and RevShare is the key to building a profitable, high-quality growth channel.
However, the best model in the world is useless if you can’t trust your data. The success of all these app affiliate payout models depends entirely on having a reliable technical foundation to accurately track the target event—whether it’s an install, an action, or a purchase. This makes a powerful and accurate mobile attribution tool like Tapp an essential part of your stack, no matter which model you choose.
Ready to implement your chosen payout model with tracking you can trust? Sign up for your free Tapp account and set up your first conversion event.
To see how this fits into your complete affiliate strategy, read our Definitive Guide to Affiliate Marketing for Mobile Apps.