Tournament tool
Bubble Factor Calculator
How much more does losing cost than winning gains? Enter the stacks and the payouts still to be paid for your bubble factor against every opponent — and the equity you actually need to call an all-in, which is never 50% once there is money on the line.
Stacks
Tap a label to choose whose decision it is. ICM is exact up to nine players.
Payouts left
Only the prizes still to be awarded. Equal amounts make it a satellite, which is where bubble factors get extreme.
Your bubble factors (10,000 stack)
| Opponent | At risk | Bubble factor | Equity to call |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 40,000 | 10,000 | 1.57 | 61.2% |
| P2 30,000 | 10,000 | 1.48 | 59.7% |
| P3 20,000 | 10,000 | 1.30 | 56.5% |
A real risk premium. You need about 61% equity, so coin flips are losing plays and the calling range tightens noticeably.
Your opponent needs more than a coin flip to call, so shoving picks up more folds than chip-EV suggests.
Where the number comes from
Break-even equity is the loss divided by the total swing, which is the same as bubble factor ÷ (1 + bubble factor) — 61.2% here, against 50% if the chips were cash. That gap is the risk premium, and it is the whole reason ICM changes how you play.
Next
Turn the required equity into a range with the push/fold chart, price a deal with the ICM calculator or the chop calculator, and check what a hand is actually worth against a range in the range equity calculator. Satellite seats have their own maths in the satellite calculator.
Guide
What a bubble factor is, and what to do with it
In a cash game a chip is worth a chip, so a coin flip for your stack is free. In a tournament it is not: busting ends your run at the prizes while doubling up only improves your share of them. The bubble factor puts a number on that asymmetry, and the number tells you exactly how much equity a call needs.
The definition
Bubble factor = (prize equity you lose by losing) ÷ (prize equity you gain by winning)
Both figures come from ICM: the model works out what your stack is worth in money, given the stacks around you and the prizes left. A factor of 1.0 means chips are money. A factor of 2.0 means losing costs twice what winning gains — and that turns straight into the equity you need:
Equity needed to call = bubble factor ÷ (1 + bubble factor)
- Factor 1.0 → 50%. A cash game, or heads-up for the title.
- Factor 1.25 → 56%. A mild premium; the thinnest calls come out.
- Factor 1.5 → 60%. Coin flips are losing plays.
- Factor 2.0 → 67%. Only clear favourites can call.
- Factor 4.0 → 80%. Almost nothing continues.
Why heads-up for the title is a cash game again
Two players left, 40,000 against 60,000, with first and second still to be paid: the bubble factor is exactly 1.00. Once the only places left are the two you can finish in, your prize equity is a straight line in chips, so a 51% flip is a good gamble. Every ICM effect in a tournament lives in the hands before that.
The money bubble
Four left, three paid, stacks 40,000 / 30,000 / 20,000 / 10,000 and $5,000 / $3,000 / $2,000to come. The chip leader's factor against the short stack is 1.13 — it needs 53% to call, barely more than a flip, because busting the short stack is worth a lot and the leader is not going home if it fails. Flip the same spot around and the short stack needs far more, which is the asymmetry the whole bubble runs on:
| Spot | At risk | Bubble factor | Equity to call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip leader vs short stack | 10,000 | 1.13 | 53% |
| Short stack vs chip leader | 10,000 | 1.57 | 61% |
| Second vs third (covered) | 20,000 | 2.17 | 68% |
| Third vs second (covering) | 20,000 | 1.48 | 60% |
Notice the middle rows. The player who is covered always has the higher factor, whatever the stacks are called — being able to bust is what makes a chip expensive.
Satellites: where you can fold aces
Five players, four equal seats, stacks 30,000 / 25,000 / 20,000 / 15,000 / 10,000. Second in chips against the leader has a bubble factor of 9.29, which demands 90% equity to call an all-in. Pocket aces against a random hand is about 85%. That is less than 90%, so in this exact spot calling off with aces is a losing play — the single most counter-intuitive consequence of ICM, and it is arithmetic rather than opinion.
The reason is that the seats are identical. Winning a pot you did not need adds nothing, because a seat is a seat; losing one costs you the seat entirely. The satellite calculator works the same structure from the other direction — how many chips you need rather than how much equity a call needs.
Using it at the table
- Nobody computes this live. What you take to the table are two or three numbers for the shape of spot you keep meeting — covered short stack on the bubble, big stack against a mid stack, satellite with one seat left over.
- The factor is per-opponent, not per-table. Your factor against the player who covers you is high; against the player you cover it is low. That is why the correct play is to attack the stacks that cannot call.
- It cuts both ways.A high factor on your opponent's side is a licence to shove. Pressure on the bubble is profitable because the maths forbids them from calling, not because they are timid.
- Flat payouts raise it; steep payouts lower it. A winner-take-all has a factor of 1 everywhere. Equal seats produce the steepest factors in poker. Everything else is in between.
What this model assumes
The figures come from the Malmuth-Harville ICM, the same implementation behind our ICM calculator. It treats every player as equally skilled and ignores position, blind level and future play, which means it slightly overstates the equity of short stacks that still have moves and understates a good player's edge. It is the standard model for exactly this reason: it is the one everyone else's numbers come from too. Treat a bubble factor as the price of the chips, not as a decision — you still have to judge how often the shove is folding out better hands, which is what what is ICM in poker and the push/fold chart are for.
Frequently asked questions
What is a bubble factor in poker?›
The ratio of the prize equity you lose by losing an all-in to the prize equity you gain by winning it. A factor of 1.0 means chips are worth their face value, as in a cash game. A factor of 1.5 means losing costs half again as much as winning gains, so the call needs 60% equity instead of 50%.
How do you calculate bubble factor?›
Work out your ICM equity now, your equity if you win the pot, and your equity if you lose it. The bubble factor is (equity now − equity if you lose) divided by (equity if you win − equity now). This calculator does it for every opponent at the table, because the answer is different against each one.
How much equity do I need with a bubble factor of 2?›
About 67%. The formula is bubble factor divided by (1 + bubble factor), so 2 / 3 = 0.667. At a factor of 1.5 you need 60%, at 3.0 you need 75%, and at 1.0 you need the 50% a cash game asks for.
Why is the bubble factor different against each player?›
Because the amount at risk and the consequences differ. Against a player who covers you, losing means busting, which is the most expensive thing that can happen. Against a player you cover, losing costs only their stack and you play on. That asymmetry is why the correct bubble strategy is to put pressure on the stacks that cannot afford to call.
Can you really fold aces in a satellite?›
Yes, and the arithmetic is not close. In a five-handed satellite paying four equal seats, the second-biggest stack calling an all-in from the chip leader can face a bubble factor above 9, which demands more than 90% equity. Aces against a random hand is about 85%. Winning that pot adds almost nothing because a seat is a seat, while losing it costs the seat outright.
Is bubble factor the same as ICM?›
No — it is one thing you read off an ICM model. ICM values your whole stack in money; the bubble factor is the ratio of what one specific all-in would cost and gain. Both come from the same calculation, which is why the numbers here match our ICM and chop calculators exactly.
Does a bubble factor of 1 ever happen in a tournament?›
Yes: heads-up for the title. When the only places left are the two you can finish in, prize equity is linear in chips again, so a 51% flip is a good gamble. It also happens in a winner-take-all, where there is only one prize to divide.
Related tools
Convert tournament chip stacks to dollar equity. Chops and bubbles.
Heads-up Nash short-stack push and call ranges by effective stack.
Orbits your stack can survive, the zone it falls in, and M in big blinds.
Interesting spots. Solver-grade analysis.
Occasional strategy emails: one interesting hand, broken down with equity, range vs range, and the GTO answer. Free, unsubscribe any time.
Unlimited AI hand reviews and every cheatsheet — PRO from $9/mo