The main MLM compensation plans are binary, unilevel, matrix, board or matrix-cycle, generation, monoline and hybrid, and the right plan depends on recruiting depth versus width, payout predictability, and how much complexity a company can administer.

Compensation plans

MLM compensation plans, explained

Your plan drives your software choice. Here's how each major plan works and when it's the right fit — before you pick a platform to run it on.

The plans

Every major plan at a glance

Most businesses run one, then evolve into a hybrid.

Binary — two-leg pairing
Unilevel — single-line depth
Matrix — forced width × depth
Board / Matrix cycle — revolving boards
Generation — rank-based generations
Monoline — single global line
Australian binary
Stairstep breakaway
Hybrid — mix and match

When to use which plan

Binary — simple, balance-driven growth

Members build two legs and earn on the weaker leg's volume. It's easy to explain and rewards teamwork, but pairing and carry-over rules must be modelled carefully or payouts drift. Best when you want fast, viral recruiting with a plan distributors grasp immediately.

Unilevel and generation — reward depth and rank

Unilevel places everyone you sponsor on your front line and pays several levels deep, which suits product-focused businesses with steady repurchase. Generation plans layer rank-based generations on top, rewarding leaders who develop other leaders. Choose these when retention and consumption matter more than recruiting speed.

Matrix, board and monoline — structured and predictable

Matrix plans cap width and depth (a 3×9, for example), boards cycle members through revolving positions, and monoline places everyone in one global line. These forced structures make payouts predictable and encourage spillover, but they need a commission engine that handles positions and cycles precisely.

Hybrid — combine strengths as you grow

Established companies often run a hybrid — a binary for recruiting speed plus a unilevel or matrix for product depth. Hybrids are powerful but demand a platform where rules are configurable and testable, because the interactions between plans are where payout errors hide.

Compare

Plans side by side

PlanStructureRewardsBest when
BinaryTwo legsWeaker-leg volumeFast, simple recruiting
UnilevelOne front line, deepLevel payoutsSteady product repurchase
MatrixFixed width × depthSpillover + fillsPredictable, structured growth
BoardRevolving boardsCycle bonusesMomentum and cycling
GenerationRank generationsLeadership depthDeveloping leaders
MonolineSingle global linePosition orderSimple, viral programs
HybridCombinedMultiple streamsMature, evolving networks

Ready to get started?

Book a free demo or ask our AI assistant anything — it's here 24/7.