A 5-rule optimization approach that helped turn unstable tracking and shifting KPIs into consistent deposit volume within 3 months.
Anyone running traffic to iGaming apps knows the scenario: tracking inconsistencies, disappearing data, broken in-app events, app-side issues, and KPIs changing in the middle of the campaign.
This case study breaks down how PropellerAds iGaming partner managed to stabilize the funnel and achieve 97,674 installs and 21,134 registrations over a three-month period.
Karlina Berzina, Senior Account Strategist at PropellerAds: This partner has been with us for a long time, and our collaboration goes well beyond just sourcing traffic. We have formats that let us guide users across the entire funnel: from broad reach and initial brand discovery to repeat touch points and optimization toward deposits and retention. For iGaming, this matters more than anywhere else: sustainable growth simply isn’t possible without retaining users and increasing their LTV.
That’s why our focus has shifted to being a true performance partner, not just a traffic source – one that helps advertisers work with audience quality across the full user lifecycle. To support this, we also have dedicated specialists who focus specifically on growing partners in the iGaming segment.
The framework below can be applied both to affiliate offers and proprietary iGaming apps.
Case Overview
From the beginning, the campaign faced some challenges: inaccurate tracking, periods without data, technical problems on the app and store side, and constantly shifting KPIs.
Maintaining stable performance required continuous optimization and active traffic management throughout the funnel.
The partner launched with the following KPI caps:
Install: ~$8
Registration: $15–25
Deposit (FTD): $45–55
The goal was clear: keep the funnel stable from install to deposit while maintaining target acquisition costs.
Campaign Setup
Karlina: Rather than making changes too quickly, we allowed campaigns to stabilize, then continuously refined the setup by removing non-performing or less relevant traffic and focusing on segments that contributed to installs, registrations, and deposits.Bidding model selection
The campaign relied on two bidding models:CPA Goal — ideal for fast launches and identifying converting zones during the testing phase, although optimization remained focused on the first conversion event only.
SmartCPM — offered deeper traffic control and more precise bid management, but required additional time and manual optimization.
Rather than choosing one model exclusively, the partner used CPA Goal to test and discover effective traffic sources before switching to SmartCPM for scaling and optimization.
Karlina Berzina: This approach proved to be more effective: automation helped quickly gather data, while manual optimization allowed the team to refine results and meet the target KPIs. It became clear that it’s not the model itself that matters, but how you use it. Automation helps, but the best results come from combining both, knowing when to trust the algorithm and when to take control over it.
Choosing the traffic format
The campaign launched with Onclick traffic while CPA Goal and SmartCPM were tested in parallel to compare KPI performance.After the initial stage, Push and In-Page Push formats were added gradually to expand reach and improve traffic volume.
Campaign Flow: Testing and Optimization
To manage a multi-step funnel with different KPIs, the partner followed a strict optimization process.Campaigns were initially left untouched for two days to allow them to stabilize and then gather accurate cost data. During this stage, the team closely monitored OS performance, devices, browsers, and behavioral traffic signals.
Karlina: Rather than making changes too quickly, we allowed campaigns to stabilize, then continuously refined the setup by removing non-performing or less relevant traffic and focusing on segments that contributed to installs, registrations, and deposits.
The optimization process itself was built around several core principles.
Gradual removal of non-converting zones
Traffic was segmented by zones, user behavior, and performance indicators to determine whether it contributed to conversion goals.Traffic segments that failed to produce value were removed progressively to improve efficiency and reduce wasted spend.
Blacklist and whitelist management
The partner also implemented clear filtering rules for blacklists and whitelists.Rule 1: No Signal
Zones spending more than the equivalent of two deposit conversions without generating installs, registrations, or deposits were blacklisted immediately.
Rule 2: Empty Promise
Zones driving registration volume without meaningful post-registration actions were also excluded.
Rule 3: Proven Performer
Traffic sources consistently generating efficient conversions were added to the whitelist.
The case study additionally demonstrated that whitelisting requires significantly more time than blacklisting because traffic quality was evaluated based on completed deposits rather than early funnel events.
Respecting the conversion window
The optimization strategy also accounted for user behavior and conversion timing.The team analyzed:
- user engagement duration;
- expected conversion timing after install or sign-up.
The workflow itself was structured in two phases:
Step 1: Allow campaigns to stabilize for at least two days without interference.
Step 2: Begin data analysis, apply the ‘No Signal’ rule, and continue optimization based on performance signals.
Gradual scaling across formats
According to Karlina, scaling works best when the initial setup is fully stabilized before expanding into additional formats.The campaign started with Onclick traffic only. Once the funnel showed consistent results, Push and In-Page Push formats were added to broaden reach and increase scale.
Campaigns were also separated by bidding model for more transparent testing.
Results and Key Takeaways
During the three-month campaign period, the partner achieved:97,674 installs
21,134 registrations
12,701 deposits
January SmartCPM vs CPA Goal
February same SmartCPM vs CPA Goal
March SmartCPM vs CPA Goal (Includes a push test under CPA Goal)
The campaign also reduced install costs, doubled deposit conversions, and introduced Push Notifications as an additional format currently showing positive test results.
5 Rules That Drove Results
- Setting KPI targets for every funnel stage.
- Combining CPA Goal testing with SmartCPM scaling.
- Avoiding optimization too early — allowing campaigns to stabilize first.
- Removing weak traffic quickly using simple filtering rules.
- Expanding formats gradually instead of scaling aggressively from day one.
