Per-deal commission and a period-end bonus can be tuned to cost the same amount over a year and still produce different sales behaviour every week. One pays for each deal as it lands. The other pays nothing until a line is crossed, and then pays all at once. The choice is about what you want a rep to do in the last three weeks of a quarter.
Per-deal commission pays continuously. Every closed deal produces earnings, the rep sees a number move each time, and cash arrives steadily. It rewards volume and it rewards the deal in front of the rep right now.
A period-end bonus pays on reaching a threshold. Nothing accrues visibly until attainment crosses the line, and then a lump sum lands. It rewards finishing, which is a different thing from selling, and it is the natural structure for objectives that are not measured in revenue at all.
Most plans that work use both. A modest per-deal rate keeps cash flowing and the bonus carries the upside, so the rep is paid for activity and for outcome without either mechanism doing a job it is bad at.
Take a rep with a $20,000 quarterly variable target who finishes the year at 125 percent of a $500,000 quarterly quota. Below are three plans, each tuned to land near the same annual cost, so the comparison is about rhythm rather than about who is paid more overall.
| Structure | How it pays | Annual total | What the rep feels |
|---|---|---|---|
| Per-deal only, 5 percent | 5 percent of $2,500,000 | $125,000 | Steady, every deal counts |
| Bonus only, 1.25x target | 1.25 x $20,000, four quarters | $100,000 | Nothing, then everything |
| Split, 3 percent plus 0.5x bonus | $75,000 plus $40,000 | $115,000 | Steady with a finish line |
The annual figures are close. The experience is not. Under the bonus-only plan a rep who ends a quarter at 99 percent receives nothing for that quarter, having closed $495,000. Under the per-deal plan the same rep receives $24,750.
That cliff is the mechanism, not a flaw. It is also the reason bonus-only structures suit roles with predictable, controllable pipelines and punish roles where one customer's legal review decides the quarter.
A bonus can be written as a fixed dollar amount or as a multiple of the rep's variable target. The multiple is almost always better, for a reason that has nothing to do with motivation.
A fixed amount hard-codes a compensation band into the plan. Promote the rep, hire a senior version of the role, or adjust variable pay at the annual review, and the plan has to be re-authored. Teams that carry a dozen fixed bonus amounts across a dozen plans end up with plans that are silently out of date with the compensation model.
A multiplier applied to each rep's own variable target keeps the plan stable while the people move through it. The rep with a $20,000 target and the rep with $60,000 sit on the same plan and are paid proportionally, and a promotion changes the payout without anyone editing a rule.
A bonus rule pays once, so period boundaries matter more than usual. Per-deal rules are forgiving about exactly which day a deal lands, because the deal pays either way. A bonus is decided by attainment at the moment the period closes, so a deal that slips by two days can move the entire payout. Expect pressure on close dates near period end, and expect disputes about them.
Late deals reopen a closed period. A deal that arrives after the bonus has been calculated changes attainment and therefore changes whether the bonus was owed. Either the period is genuinely locked, and late deals count toward the next one, or it is not, and a paid statement can move. Both are workable, and the plan needs to say which.
Objectives that are not revenue still need a measurable target. MBO-style bonuses fail more often on measurement than on structure. Renewals retained, accounts onboarded, and certifications completed all work as bonus rules, and each needs a number that exists somewhere queryable at period end. Objectives that only a manager can assess belong in a separate process, not in an automated plan.
A period-end bonus is one rule with a different execution phase. Rather than running per deal, it evaluates once at the end of the period, reads the rep's attainment, and pays a multiple of their variable target. The tiers hold multipliers rather than percentages, so the same rule scales across compensation bands.
Adding a per-deal rate alongside it is a second rule in the same plan rather than a second system, which is what keeps the split structure to one statement and one approval. Price the split before adopting it: moving upside from per-deal into a bonus changes when reps are paid, and cash timing tends to generate more feedback than the annual total does.
This plan has one rule.
Pays a share of the rep's variable target (their commission budget for the period), with the rate chosen by quarterly quota attainment. Runs once at the end of each quarter period, not per deal.
| Attainment | Pays |
|---|---|
| 80% to 100% | 0.5x variable target |
| 100% to 125% | 1x variable target |
| 125% and above | 1.25x variable target |
Crossing a tier re-rates the whole quarter at the higher rate, not just the revenue above it.
This is the whole plan. Send it to POST /v1/plans and it is live; change a rate and re-send it to ship a revision.
curl -X POST https://api.compcode.ai/v1/plans \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $COMPCODE_API_KEY" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"name": "Quota Bonus 2026",
"effectiveStart": "2026-01-01",
"config": {
"rules": [
{
"name": "Period Bonus",
"executionPhase": "periodic",
"measure": "closed_won_revenue",
"attainmentPeriod": "quarterly",
"tierBy": "attainment",
"tierMode": "full_rate",
"payoutBase": "variable_target",
"tiers": [
{
"minThreshold": 0.8,
"rate": 0.5
},
{
"minThreshold": 1,
"rate": 1
},
{
"minThreshold": 1.25,
"rate": 1.25
}
]
}
]
}
}'Connect your CRM, create the plan with one call, and simulate before anyone gets paid.
Start free →