Target and Control Groups
To evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions, Amplifier AI compares player behaviour across two groups:
- Target Group: Players who are predicted to churn and receive a bonus.
- Control Group: Players who are predicted to churn but bonuses are not awarded.
Group allocations can be customized based on operator preferences, usually 80% / 20%
KPIs to Measure
Amplifier AI tracks and analyses key performance indicators to gain valuable insights into player engagement, revenue generation and retention. These metrics include:
- Stakes: Total amount wagered by players.
- GGR (Gross Gaming Revenue): Revenue before costs.
- NGR (Net Gaming Revenue): Revenue after deducting costs.
- Number of Spins: Total spins in a given period.
- Number of Sessions: Total player sessions.
- Session Length: Average session duration.
- Retention Rate: Percentage of players who remain active.
Reporting Dashboards
The dashboards enable operators to analyse players behaviour and campaign effectiveness in churn prevention. It compares the Target Group (players identified with risk to churn and received a bonus) against the Control Group (players identified with risk to churn but didn’t receive a bonus) to measure the impact of the bonus interventions.
All pages can be filtered by group, player segment and any configured time period.
- Time Period: Displays data for all players identified as at risk of churning within the selected timeframe, categorised as either Target or Control.
- Group: Enables filtering to show data for the Target group, Control group or both.
- Player Segment: Allows data to be filtered by award tier, typically categorised as High, Medium or Low.
ROI Summary
Uplift Calculation
The calculation compares the Target Group against the Control Group to isolate the effect of the bonus intervention. This method enables a clear assessment of the bonus strategy's effectiveness.
The approach is to show in how much the bonus intervention impacted the Revenue Uplift. The Control group behaviour gives the baseline (as there was no intervention) and the difference we see in the Target Group shows the actual impact of the bonus given.
Then, the bonus cost is deducted in order to get the Net Uplift.
- Player Count – Number of players identified with the risk to churn during the time period selected. Target Group Players had bonus intervention, while Control Group didn’t get any.
- Total Awarded – Total amount of bonus given. For the Control group the amount is 0, as only the Target Group awarded with bonus.
- Control Uplift % – Calculated by using the Control Group’s ratio between Post-Revenue and Pre-Revenue. This is used as the baseline uplift, when there is no bonus intervention.
- Pre-Revenue – Total revenue 30 days prior to the churn prediction date.
- Post-Revenue – Total revenue 30 days after the churn prediction date.
- Expected Revenue – For the Control group is equal to the Post-Revenue value, as no intervention. For the Target Group it is calculated as [Pre-Revenue] * [ Control Uplift %].
- Bonus Cost = 95% of [Total Awarded]. The actual cost of the bonus to the operator.
- Net Uplift = [Post Revenue] – [Expected Revenue] – [Bonus Cost]. Relevant only for the Target Group.
- Net Uplift % = [Net Uplift] / [Expected Revenue]
Overview
In session award Performance
The table compares the Target and Control group performance within the session in-which an award is made. We anticipate the Target Group, who receives incentives when churn is predicted, to show a higher average number of spins and longer session lengths compared to the Control Group.
- Awards – Number of awards that were given to players identified at risk to churn. For the Control group it is only a theoretical value as no real awards were given.
- Total Awarded – Total amount of bonus given. For the Control group the amount is 0, as only the Target Group awarded with bonus.
- Average Award Spin Number – When exactly during the player’s session the bonus intervention occurred, in which spin number of the session.
- Stakes – Average stakes in a session
- Spins – Average number of total spins completed
- Session Length – Average session length in minutes
Average Stakes 30 days from Award
Graph that compares the Average stakes per player 30 days from getting the bonus. We expect to see higher values for the Target group, being incentivised.
Award Impact
Intervention Trigger vs Total Session Spins
A scatter plot graph that shows the relationship between when an intervention is triggered during a session (x-axis) and the total number of spins in that session (y-axis).
Each point on the scatter plot represents an individual player session, with its position determined by these two variables. This is useful for identifying patterns, correlations or outliers in the data.
Showing only the Target Group sessions which had interventions.
Award over time
This visualisation helps casino operators monitor the scale and consistency of their churn prevention efforts while tracking the associated costs through bonus distribution over time.
Key Elements:
- Blue Bars: Number of awards given
- Yellow Line: Value of awards given
This breakdown supports cost monitoring and highlights trends that may indicate areas for further optimiation.
Pre vs Post Recommendation Selected
This page provides an overview of player behaviour and spending across the two groups (Target and Control) during both a pre-intervention period and post-intervention period. It includes metrics on stakes, sessions and spins to help monitor changes over time.
Key Elements:
- Pre-Period Values Across Groups: Displays data on unique players, total stakes, total sessions, and averages for stakes, spins and sessions for the 30 days leading up to the intervention. This helps to identify baseline behaviours and spending patterns across the Target and Control groups.
- Post-Period Values Across Groups: Shows similar metrics for the 30 days after the intervention is made (including the day of the award), allowing for direct comparison with pre-period values to assess changes in player activity and spending.
- Pre-Period vs Post-Period Comparison: Highlights the percentage difference in the key metrics from the Pre to Post periods across both groups. This helps operators understand the relative impact of the intervention, with increased percentages indicating a higher engagement and spending pattern post-intervention.
The overall visualisation helps casino operators monitor and analyse player engagement, activity and spend progression, supporting data-driven decisions for future interventions.