PokerStars Supernova vs. iPoker 65% Rakeback Comparison
By Taylor Cuccia, Rakeback.com Contributor
In a PokerStars vs. iPoker rake comparison rematch, we factor in rakeback and compare the effective rake of each site for an example player, making arguably a more relevant comparison than using rake numbers alone.
|Note that these rake figures are averages, and each player’s style will affect their rake paid. In general, tighter players will pay less rake than loose players.|
- Play exclusively 6-max No-Limit Holdem.
- Play the exact volume required to achieve PokerStars’ Supernova status on both PokerStars and iPoker.
- Have a flat 65% rakeback deal with iPoker.
We determined 24.1% to be the effective rakeback percentage of a player reaching Supernova status on PokerStars, as with our example player, using the PokerStars Rakeback Calculator. We used this number for appropriate calculations.
For a 100nl player to reach Supernova, he needs to play about 1,360 hands per day or nearly half a million hands a year. We will make a full discussion of volume based on stakes at a later date.
Before Factoring in Rakeback
|Stake||6-Max NLHE (bb/100)|
PokerStars sweeps every stake when we compare rake before factoring in rakeback.
|Stake||6-Max NLHE (bb/100)|
To take rakeback into consideration, we multiply pure rake by the inverse of our rakeback percentage to give us the effective rake. As the table illustrates, iPoker shows lower effictive rakes than PokerStars across all stakes for our example player.
Note that this is just one example. Because iPoker offers a flat rakeback and PokerStars has a VIP program in which rakeback percentage increases with volume, iPoker will not have lower effective rake for all players. At some volume, PokerStars may overtake iPoker in terms of effective rake. Numbers may also come out different for those playing other games.
iPoker recently began using a sourced based rake system for allocating revenue to skins. Though it does not affect how rake is calculated for players, it changes how revenue is distributed across iPoker skins, in favor of skins which generate rake from net depositors (aka losing/recreational players).
This means that skins will likely begin offering bonuses catered to recreational players rather than high-volume grinders. This will in turn lower bonuses and rewards for profitable players.
Theoretically, however, these changes should bring in more recreational players and make the games more profitable for winning players despite the lower rakeback percentage.
Being that this is a different underlying system than PokerStars uses, and that we don’t yet know what its net effect will be, this comparison is somewhat imperfect.
After factoring in rakeback, iPoker sweeps every stake for our example player, thus they take the crown in this edition of rakeback comparisons.