Pool Payout Calculator: FPPS vs PPS+ vs PPLNS vs TIDES Compared

FPPS, PPS+, PPLNS, and TIDES all deliver the same expected BTC earnings per terahash — what differs is who absorbs variance, how quickly sats settle, and whether the pool holds your funds in custody.

Pool payout schemes are often described as if one is universally “better” than another. In practice every scheme makes a different bargain between income smoothness and miner sovereignty. This calculator makes that bargain visible using your actual numbers: enter your hashrate and pool parameters to see identical expected daily and monthly earnings across all four schemes, plus a rigorous variance range for PPLNS. The custody and decentralization differences are shown alongside the math so you can weigh them together.

How the four payout schemes differ

Every Bitcoin mining pool distributes the same underlying resource — BTC earned from block subsidy and transaction fees — but the timing, risk allocation, and custody model vary dramatically by scheme. For a deep technical treatment of the mechanics, see Mining pool payout methods explained: FPPS vs PPS vs PPLNS vs TIDES and the Mining pools hub. This section summarises each scheme at the level needed to interpret the calculator output.

FPPS — Full Pay-Per-Share

The pool pays a guaranteed, pre-calculated rate for every valid share you submit — covering both block subsidy and transaction fees — regardless of whether the pool actually finds a block in that period. The pool absorbs all luck variance. From a miner’s perspective, income arrives as predictably as a salary. The trade-off: the pool must maintain reserves to guarantee payouts during bad-luck runs, which drives higher fees (typically 2–4%, publicly listed). Block template construction also stays entirely with the pool operator.

PPS+ — Pay-Per-Share Plus

A hybrid of FPPS: the block subsidy component is paid at a guaranteed fixed per-share rate (zero variance for the miner), but actual transaction fee revenue from blocks the pool finds is passed through and distributed as-earned rather than averaged. The subsidy portion is risk-free; the fee income introduces a small amount of block-find variance. Expected value is identical to FPPS. Braiins Pool transitioned from PPLNS to FPPS+ in 2024 as the dominant large-pool payout model.

PPLNS — Pay-Per-Last-N-Shares

Payouts are drawn only from blocks the pool actually finds, distributed proportionally across the last N shares submitted. No block found means no payout in that round. Long-term miners who submit shares consistently earn the full expected value over time; miners who join immediately before a block is found and leave afterwards (“pool-hoppers”) are penalised. PPLNS pools typically charge lower fees (1–3%, publicly listed) because miners — not the pool — absorb block-finding luck variance. The shares, luck, and hashrate dynamics article covers the full mathematical picture.

TIDES — Transaction Income and Deficit Smoothing (OCEAN)

TIDES was developed by OCEAN in 2023 to address the custodial and transparency limitations of both FPPS and PPLNS. Like PPLNS, payouts come from actual blocks found by the pool and are proportional to recent share contributions. Unlike PPLNS, deficit smoothing spreads shortfalls across future blocks rather than leaving miners with hard zero-payout rounds. Critically, in OCEAN’s implementation, payouts are non-custodial: they are written directly into the coinbase transaction of each found block, so you receive sats from the Bitcoin protocol itself — not from a pool wallet. OCEAN also publishes its block templates publicly for auditability. The DATUM protocol (a Stratum V2 extension built on TIDES) gives miners the ability to specify transaction preferences without surrendering template control. See Exploring TIDES: a new era in mining pool rewards for the full mechanics. TIDES smoothing parameters are defined by OCEAN; the authoritative specification is at ocean.xyz/docs/tides (link opens OCEAN’s external documentation).

Pool payout calculator

Enter your hashrate and pool parameters. All four schemes show the same expected daily BTC — this is mathematically correct. The key differences are in the variance column and the custody model. The PPLNS income range uses a Compound Poisson variance formula sourced from first principles; see the formula box below the results.

Estimate only — verify before acting. Results depend on live market conditions: BTC price, network hashrate, and per-block transaction fees all fluctuate continuously. Verify current network hashrate at mempool.space/graphs/mining/hashrate-difficulty, per-block fees at mempool.space/graphs/mining/block-fees, and BTC price at your preferred exchange before making operational decisions. This calculator does not constitute financial or investment advice.

Your miner

Your hashrate (TH/s)

Common values: Antminer S21 ≈ 200 TH/s · S21 Pro ≈ 234 TH/s ·
S19j Pro ≈ 104 TH/s · Bitaxe Gamma ≈ 1.2 TH/s.
Add multiple miners by summing their TH/s.

Pool fee (%)

Applies to all schemes for fair comparison. Typical ranges: FPPS 2–4% ·
PPLNS 1–3% · OCEAN/TIDES: check ocean.xyz directly — fee is taken
from the coinbase subsidy, not as a percentage of miner payout.
All fees publicly listed at each pool’s website.

Network parameters — verify at source before use

Network hashrate (EH/s)

Default ≈ 760 EH/s (mid-2026 rough estimate; changes with every difficulty adjustment).
Always verify at mempool.space/graphs/mining/hashrate-difficulty.
1 EH = 1,000,000 TH.

BTC price (USD) — estimate only

Market price fluctuates continuously. Use your exchange’s live quote.
USD output is illustrative only.

Avg transaction fees per block (BTC)

Highly variable: ranges from <0.05 BTC to >1 BTC depending on mempool.
0.3 BTC is a rough mid-2026 average — verify at mempool.space/graphs/mining/block-fees.
Set to 0 to model subsidy-only earnings.

Pool size — % of network hashrate (PPLNS variance only)

Only affects the PPLNS variance calculation. Larger pool = more blocks/day = lower variance.
Approximate figures (verify at mempool.space/graphs/mining/pools):
Foundry ≈ 30% · AntPool ≈ 20% · Braiins ≈ 5% · OCEAN ≈ 3%.

Expected payout & variance — all four schemes

Expected daily BTC is identical for all schemes (same expected value per TH/s before fees).
Variance, custody, and sovereignty differ — read across the full row.

Scheme	Expected daily BTC (net)	Expected daily USD	Expected monthly BTC	Variance tier	Daily income range (80% CI)	Custody

Formulas used

Expected daily earnings:
Expected daily BTC (gross) = (H ÷ (N × 1,000,000)) × 144 × (subsidy + avg_tx_fees)
Expected daily BTC (net) = gross × (1 − fee% / 100)

Where:
H = your hashrate in TH/s
N = network hashrate in EH/s
1,000,000 = TH per EH (unit conversion)
144 = expected Bitcoin blocks per day (24 h × 60 min ÷ 10 min target block interval — Bitcoin protocol specification)
subsidy = 3.125 BTC — block subsidy after the 4th halving, April 19 2024, block 840,000. Halves again at block 1,050,000 (~April 2028).

PPLNS variance (Compound Poisson model):
λ = pool_size_pct × 144 / 100 — expected blocks found by pool per day (Poisson distributed)
σ = Expected_daily_BTC_net ÷ √λ — standard deviation of daily earnings
80% confidence interval: mean ± 1.282 × σ
Normal approximation is valid when λ ≥ 5 (pool finds at least 5 blocks/day on average).

Derivation: A stable miner holding fraction s of pool hashrate earns s × R per found block (where R = block reward). Blocks found by the pool follow Poisson(λ). By the Compound Poisson variance identity: Var[daily] = λ × (s × R)², so SD = s × R × √λ = E[daily] ÷ √λ. This is a lower bound — actual variance is higher due to tx-fee fluctuations and PPLNS window edge effects.

Sources: Bitcoin protocol specification; Bitcoin blockchain (halving event, block 840,000); standard Compound Poisson variance identity.

Understanding payout variance — why it matters more than average income

Two miners with identical hashrate, connected to different pools under different payout schemes, will have the same expected BTC earnings over a long period. But their day-to-day and week-to-week experience can look completely different. Variance is the measure of how much actual outcomes scatter around the expected value.

Where variance comes from in PPLNS

Under PPLNS, your earnings only arrive when the pool finds a block. The number of blocks a pool finds on any given day follows a Poisson distribution — a statistical model for rare, random events that happen at a roughly constant average rate. A pool controlling 10% of network hashrate is expected to find 14.4 blocks per day (144 × 0.10). But on any particular day it might find 8, or 21. Your share of each found block is approximately constant (proportional to your TH/s relative to the pool’s total), so your daily income swings with the block count.

The calculator uses the Compound Poisson variance identity to compute the daily standard deviation: σ = E[daily] / √λ, where λ is the pool’s expected blocks per day. A larger pool has a larger λ, so the √λ denominator grows and variance shrinks. This is why the same miner experiences very different variance at a 3% pool (OCEAN’s approximate share) versus a 30% pool (Foundry’s approximate share).

Why FPPS eliminates variance for the miner

FPPS pools pay you a guaranteed rate per share regardless of block luck. The pool is effectively acting as an insurer: it absorbs the variance itself, funded by reserves and the fee premium it charges above PPLNS rates. From your perspective, daily FPPS income is as stable as the number of shares you submit — which is deterministic given a constant hashrate. The variance is still there; the pool just bears it instead of you.

Practical implications

Cash flow planning: If you need predictable monthly income to pay electricity bills, FPPS or PPS+ removes the uncertainty. If you can absorb variance, PPLNS or TIDES typically come with lower fees.
Small hashrate on small pools: A Bitaxe at 1.2 TH/s on a pool with 1% of network hashrate faces a λ of about 1.44 blocks/day — so many days the pool finds zero blocks and you receive nothing, followed by days where the pool finds a cluster. The 80% CI model breaks down at λ < 5; use a larger pool or a solo-mining proxy like CKPool if you want direct feedback on your contributions.
The long-run guarantee: All schemes converge to the same expected earnings over enough time. PPLNS does not pay less than FPPS on average — it pays differently over time. If a pool’s PPLNS fee is 1% versus a 2.5% FPPS fee at the same pool, the PPLNS miner earns 1.5 percentage points more per block over the long run.

For a full decision framework including the probability of your pool never finding a block in a given time window, see Pool mining vs solo mining — the complete decision guide and the Solo Mining Probability Calculator.

Rule of thumb: Divide 100% by the square root of your pool’s blocks-per-day to get an approximate coefficient of variation (CV) for daily PPLNS earnings. A 30% pool (43 blocks/day) gives CV ≈ 15%. A 3% pool (4.3 blocks/day) gives CV ≈ 48%. Lower CV = smoother income.

A note on TIDES and OCEAN

This calculator shows TIDES as “Moderate (smoothed)” variance with a note that exact parameters are available at OCEAN’s documentation. This is intentional: TIDES is not a generic protocol — it is a specific, published algorithm designed by OCEAN, and reproducing it precisely requires their smoothing coefficients, which are OCEAN’s intellectual work and subject to change. Fabricating those numbers would produce misleading output.

What we can state accurately about TIDES:

In expectation, TIDES pays the same BTC per TH/s as PPLNS at the same pool, same fees.
The deficit-smoothing mechanism redistributes shortfalls from low-luck periods to later blocks, reducing the “zero-payout day” phenomenon that PPLNS miners on small pools experience.
Payouts are non-custodial: instead of accumulating in a pool wallet, they are written into the coinbase output of each found block. This is Bitcoin-native settlement with no pool as intermediary.
OCEAN publishes all block templates publicly, enabling independent verification that transactions are not being filtered.
The DATUM protocol gives miners participating in OCEAN the ability to set transaction selection preferences, completing the sovereignty picture: non-custodial payouts + self-chosen block contents.

For current TIDES parameters: see ocean.xyz/docs/tides. For OCEAN’s overall positioning and the OP_RETURN controversy: OCEAN Pool — a new wave in Bitcoin mining decentralization and the debate over OCEAN’s OP_RETURN size limit. Full setup guide: OCEAN mining pool guide.

Decentralization note: TIDES + DATUM at OCEAN and Stratum V2 at Braiins Pool are the only payout configurations currently available where miners retain meaningful control over block template construction. FPPS and standard PPLNS hand template authority entirely to the pool operator. D-Central’s framing: each step toward non-custodial, self-templated mining is one more layer decentralized. Credit for TIDES and DATUM goes to the OCEAN team; credit for Stratum V2 goes to Braiins, who invented Slushpool — the first mining pool in Bitcoin’s history — and co-authored the V2 specification alongside Square Crypto.

Scheme comparison at a glance

The table below summarises the structural differences between the four schemes independently of any specific hashrate input. All fee ranges are from publicly listed pool documentation; always verify at the pool’s website before configuring hardware, as fee structures change.

Scheme	Who absorbs block-find variance	Payout timing	Transaction fees shared	Typical fee range	Custody model	Block template control
FPPS	Pool (guarantees per-share rate from reserves)	Per-share, continuous; payout when threshold met	Averaged into per-share rate (pool bears tx-fee variance)	2–4% (publicly listed at each pool)	Custodial — pool wallet	Pool operator only
PPS+	Pool (subsidy); miner (small tx-fee component)	Per-share for subsidy; block-find for fee windfall	Actual tx fees from found blocks passed through	2–4% (similar to FPPS; publicly listed)	Custodial — pool wallet	Pool operator only
PPLNS	Miner (earnings only from blocks actually found)	Per-found-block; proportional to last N shares	Yes, from actual block tx fees	1–3% (lower because miner absorbs variance)	Custodial — pool wallet	Pool operator only
TIDES (OCEAN)	Miner, smoothed across blocks by pool algorithm	Per-found-block with deficit smoothing; written into coinbase	Yes, from actual block tx fees and subsidy	Publicly listed at ocean.xyz — verify directly; structure differs from FPPS/PPLNS	Non-custodial — protocol-level coinbase payout	Pool + miner via DATUM protocol

Fee ranges sourced from publicly listed documentation as of mid-2026. Fee structures change; verify at each pool’s official website before configuring hardware. OCEAN’s fee model differs structurally from FPPS/PPLNS pools; see ocean.xyz for current terms.

Choosing the right scheme for your situation

The calculator shows identical expected earnings across all schemes because the math is neutral. The decision comes down to three variables: your variance tolerance, your sovereignty priorities, and your cash flow requirements.

Choose FPPS or PPS+ if

You need predictable monthly income to cover electricity and operational costs.
You run an industrial operation where smooth cash flow enables better treasury management.
You mine seasonally or turn off hardware frequently — short mining windows can leave PPLNS miners with zero payouts if the pool has a run of bad luck during their session.
You are comfortable with the pool operator controlling block templates and holding your BTC in custody.

Choose PPLNS if

You run hardware continuously and plan to stay with one pool long-term. Long-term steady contributors earn the full expected value and benefit from the lower fee structure.
You can absorb 15–40% daily income variance. Over a full month or quarter the average converges.
You want to discourage pool-hopping within the pool’s miner base (a feature of PPLNS that benefits stable miners).

Choose TIDES (OCEAN) if

Non-custodial settlement matters to you. Your BTC goes directly from the Bitcoin protocol to your wallet address, with no pool intermediary holding funds.
Transaction censorship resistance is a priority. OCEAN publishes templates publicly; DATUM lets you set your own transaction preferences.
You are comfortable with the moderate variance that comes with OCEAN’s current pool size and want to support the decentralization properties that OCEAN and the DATUM protocol provide.

For Canadian home miners

Electricity rates in Canada vary dramatically by province — Quebec hydro at <$0.07/kWh makes variance more tolerable than Alberta grid power at >$0.15/kWh, because your margin per BTC is wider. See Canada electricity rates by province and the Mining Power Cost Calculator to model your specific situation. If you run a Bitaxe or small open-source miner, mining directly at a solo proxy (CKPool) or OCEAN avoids the custodial exposure entirely, at the cost of higher payout variance. For full profitability modelling, use the Mining Profitability Calculator and Cost to Mine 1 Bitcoin Calculator.

Frequently asked questions

Why do all four payout schemes show the same expected daily BTC in the calculator?

Because in expectation, all fair pool payout schemes distribute the same amount of BTC per terahash-second of contributed work. The expected value depends only on your hashrate relative to the network, the block reward, and the pool fee. What the schemes differ in is when that BTC arrives and who bears the risk of luck variance. FPPS pays you the expected value immediately per share; PPLNS pays you the same expected value but only from blocks actually found. Over a long enough time horizon (many months or years), the totals converge. The schemes are different risk arrangements around the same expected payout — not different payout rates. See how shares, luck, and hashrate dynamics interact for the full mathematical framework.

Why does PPLNS have higher variance than FPPS if they pay the same in the long run?

FPPS pools guarantee you a fixed rate per share from their reserves, regardless of whether the pool finds a block. The pool absorbs the variance itself and charges a higher fee (typically 2–4%) to fund those reserves. PPLNS pays only when the pool finds a block, and distributes the reward across recent share contributors. If the pool has a run of bad luck and finds fewer-than-average blocks in a day or week, your PPLNS earnings are correspondingly lower. The variance follows a Compound Poisson distribution: it’s inversely proportional to the square root of the number of blocks the pool finds per day. A 30% pool finds about 43 blocks/day on average, giving daily income a coefficient of variation (CV) of about 15%. A 3% pool finds about 4.3 blocks/day, with CV around 48%. The pool size you connect to matters as much as the payout scheme itself. This calculator lets you adjust pool size (% of network) to see the variance impact directly.

What does the “N” in PPLNS stand for, and how does each pool define it?

PPLNS stands for Pay-Per-Last-N-Shares. The “N” is a window parameter that each pool defines independently — it may be expressed as a number of shares, a time window (e.g. the last 60 minutes of submitted shares), or defined as a multiple of the current network difficulty to approximate “one expected block’s worth of shares.” The pool’s choice of N affects how quickly new miners reach full earning rate after joining (long N = slower ramp-up; short N = faster ramp-up but more pool-hopping vulnerability). This calculator’s variance formula assumes a stable, long-term miner whose share within the window is in steady state. Miners who have recently joined a PPLNS pool, or who have variable hashrate, will experience additional variance not captured by this model during the ramp-up period. Check each pool’s documentation for their specific N definition.

Is TIDES the same as PPLNS?

TIDES (Transaction Income and Deficit Smoothing) shares PPLNS’s core principle — payouts come from blocks the pool actually finds, distributed proportionally to recent share contributors. But TIDES adds two important elements that PPLNS lacks. First, deficit smoothing: when the pool has a run of bad luck and finds fewer-than-average blocks, the shortfall is carried forward and distributed across future blocks, reducing the severity of zero-payout periods. Second, and more significantly, OCEAN’s implementation of TIDES makes payouts non-custodial: your BTC is written directly into the coinbase transaction of each found Bitcoin block rather than held in a pool wallet. You receive sats from the protocol itself, not from OCEAN’s accounts. The exact smoothing parameters and coefficients are OCEAN’s design; see ocean.xyz/docs/tides for the authoritative specification. Additional context: Exploring TIDES: a new era in mining pool rewards.

If PPLNS fees are lower, why does anyone choose FPPS?

The lower PPLNS fee (typically 1–3% vs 2–4% for FPPS) is real and, over a long run, results in modestly higher net earnings for the miner. But the fee difference is the price FPPS pools charge for absorbing variance — it is a form of insurance premium. Whether that premium is worth paying depends on your situation. Industrial operators with electricity contracts, debt service, or payroll to meet need predictable monthly cash flow; variance is a genuine operational risk they pay to eliminate. Home miners with wide electricity margins and no fixed obligations can tolerate PPLNS variance in exchange for the lower fee. The fee is not a scam or an unfair overcharge; it pays for a real service (variance absorption). Conversely, choosing PPLNS when you cannot tolerate the variance is also not irrational — it’s a different risk profile. Neither scheme is universally better; they serve different risk preferences. This calculator lets you see the number impact of the fee difference at your specific hashrate.

Can I use this calculator to compare specific pools like Foundry, AntPool, or OCEAN?

Yes, with the pool-size field. Enter the pool’s approximate percentage of total network hashrate to model PPLNS variance for that pool size. For a fee comparison, enter each pool’s publicly listed fee in the fee field and recalculate. The calculator gives you the mathematical comparison; it does not fetch live data from pools. For a full comparison of fees, minimum payouts, Stratum V2 support, and decentralization properties across six major pools (Foundry, AntPool, F2Pool, Braiins Pool, OCEAN, ViaBTC), see the Mining pools hub. For a detailed breakdown of each pool’s specific architecture, see Mining pool payout methods explained. Always verify current fees and terms at each pool’s official website before configuring your hardware — fee structures and minimum payout thresholds change frequently.