Tools

Staking Yield after Fees and Token Dilution Calculator

After reward fees and token-supply growth, are you gaining relative ownership or only receiving more tokens?

A staking page shows one number, and it answers a smaller question than it appears to. Two things happen to a staked balance at once: rewards arrive, minus whatever share of them a validator or a platform keeps, and the total number of tokens in existence changes underneath. If the supply grows faster than your balance does, you end the period holding more tokens and a smaller fraction of them. This calculator separates the reward, the fee and the supply change, and reports what actually happened to your share.

What this tool does not decide

Whether to stake, or what to stake. It takes a rate you supply and tells you what that rate does under assumptions you supply. It has no view on any token, protocol, validator or platform, and it does not rank or recommend one.
Whether a rate is realistic or lasting. There is no threshold above which this tool calls a rate high, unusual or unsustainable, and none below which it calls one safe. A rate is an input here and nothing else.
What anything is worth. A share of the token supply is a share of a token count. It is not money value, not purchasing power, not governance weight and not a claim on protocol revenue. You can hold a larger share and be worse off in money terms.
Anything about price. Supply contraction does not mean the price must rise; supply growth does not mean it must fall. The optional money-value scenario uses a price change you enter, and it is not a forecast.
Anything live. No staking rate, token price, token supply, validator record or chain data is fetched, now or ever. Every figure comes from what you typed.
Slashing, missed rewards, withdrawal fees, network fees or platform failure. Each is excluded by design and stated in the methodology rather than folded into a percentage.
Anything about tax, in any jurisdiction. Staking rewards are taxed very differently from place to place and every figure here is before tax.

Your figures

The staking scenario

Advertised staking rate

Enter the APR or APY that applies to the lock or staking configuration you are modelling. The tool does not verify it, and it does not infer a higher reward tier from the lock-up duration.

That rate is an

An APR needs a reward-handling assumption before it becomes growth. An APY already includes a compounding convention and is never compounded again here.

That rate is quoted

Choose “after” only if the rate already reflects every reward fee you want included, so nothing is deducted twice. If it is already net of a validator commission but not of a platform fee, choose “before” and enter only the remaining fee.

Reward handling

For an APR this decides whether rewards compound. For a rate quoted before fees that is an APY, it defines the reward events the fee comes out of — and “not restaked” cannot be used for that. A rate already net of all fees does not need it.

Holding period

The 100-year limit is a calculation boundary, not a forecast horizon.

Holding period is in

Months are converted to years by dividing by twelve.

Net annual token-supply change

The effective annual change in the total token supply, issuance and burns together — not the staking reward rate. A negative value is a net contraction. UBWHY publishes no figure for this and does not check yours.

Starting token amount

Optional. Leave it blank to see percentages only. The tool does not ask which token it is, and does not need to.

Nothing on this page is prefilled. UBWHY publishes no normal validator commission, no typical supply-growth figure, no expected staking rate and no token-price assumption, and the tool does not judge the figures you enter or check them against anything.

The reward fees you want to model

Every fee here is a share of the staking rewards, not a charge against the tokens you already hold. A fee that is taken from your balance — a custody charge, a withdrawal fee, a network fee — is a different kind of cost and is outside this model.

Enter reward fees as

Itemising changes what you can see and nothing in the arithmetic: the parts add up over the same reward amount rather than being taken one after another.

Combined reward fee

The total share of gross rewards withheld. Enter only fees that are not already reflected in the rate above.

Itemise the reward fees

Add a money-value scenario

This is your price scenario, not a forecast and not a live price. It answers a different question from the share figure, and the two are never added together.

Include a token-price change

Total token-price change

The total change across the entire holding period, not an annual rate. Enter −100% to model the price reaching zero.

Starting token price

Optional, and needed only for absolute money values. No price is retrieved from anywhere.

Display currency

Currency changes formatting only. No exchange-rate conversion occurs.

Compare a remaining lock-up

A lock-up changes accessibility, not the reward formula. Enter the rate that applies to the configuration you are modelling in the field above; the tool does not infer a higher reward tier from the duration you enter here.

Include a remaining lock-up

Remaining lock-up

The time still to run before the principal can be accessed under your assumption — not the original maximum term.

Remaining lock-up is in

Months are converted to years by dividing by twelve.

The interactive calculation runs in your browser and needs local JavaScript, which is currently switched off. Activating the Calculate button does nothing at all: no request is sent and nothing is submitted.

Everything else on this page works without it. The model, the formulas, the timing convention, the worked example, the assumptions and the limitations are all in the methodology below, and the companion explainer covers the mechanism in full.

Your result under this scenario

One answer appears here after you choose Calculate.

Change in your share of the token supply: your token balance after the reward fees you entered, divided by the total token supply after the supply change you entered. Everything else on this page exists to show how that one figure was reached.
Change in your token balance after the fees entered is shown beside it, and it is deliberately not the answer. It is the number a staking page already gives you. More tokens is not more ownership, and the difference between those two figures is the whole reason this tool exists.

A share of the token supply is not a share of anything else. It is not money value, not purchasing power, not governance weight and not a claim on protocol revenue. You can hold a larger share of the supply and be worse off in money terms, and hold a smaller share while the token price rises. This tool forecasts neither.

Token-supply growth is not consumer-price inflation. This tool changes the number of tokens in existence and never the cost of living; nothing here is adjusted for prices in any currency.

This scenario assumes the annual reward rate and the net token-supply change entered stay constant for the whole period. It excludes slashing, missed rewards, changing protocol rules, withdrawal and network fees, tax, liquidity and platform failure.

A rising share of the supply does not make a token worth holding, and a falling one does not make it worthless. Supply contraction does not mean the price must rise, and supply growth does not mean it must fall. What the reward is funded by, whether the rate lasts, what the token does and what the platform risks are all outside this calculation.

The calculation runs in your browser: UBWHY does not receive the values you enter, nothing is sent anywhere, and nothing is written to this device. No staking rate, token price or token supply is fetched from anywhere — every figure on this page comes from what you typed.

Change in your share of the token supply

What happened to your share of the token supply after the rewards, the fees and the supply change you entered.

The three factors, and the one division that produces the answer
Measure	Start factor	End factor	Change over the period

The rate, the reward fee, the reward frequency, the holding period and the net supply change each move the result on their own. Change one at a time and choose Calculate again to see which assumption the answer actually rests on. The tool generates no low, base or high case of its own.

How this is calculated

APR and APY are not the same number

An APR is a nominal annual reward rate. It becomes growth only once you say what happens to the rewards: left alone they accrue against the balance you started with, and restaked they earn in the periods after they arrive. An APY is an effective annual growth rate that already includes a compounding convention, so it is used directly here and is never compounded a second time. An APR needs a compounding assumption before it becomes growth. An APY already has one, and adding a second is not a refinement — it silently reinterprets the figure as an APR and overstates the token growth.

A reward fee is a share of rewards

A validator commission or a platform reward fee is taken out of the rewards, not out of the tokens you already hold. At a 100% reward fee the modelled balance stops growing and stays exactly where it started. That is why the fee multiplies the rate in every formula below and never the balance — and it is also why a custody charge, a withdrawal fee or a network fee cannot be entered here: those are charges against a balance, and this model has no term for one.

Because a fee comes out of each periodic reward, taking a commission out of a gross APY is not a matter of multiplying the annual figure by what is left. The APY is converted back to the reward one period would have to pay to produce it, the fee comes out of that, and the result is compounded again. The two answers differ, and the second is the one this tool uses.

Why the answer is a division

Your share of the token supply is the token factor divided by the supply factor. It is not the token growth minus the supply growth. The two are close when both rates are small and they are not the same calculation, and the gap widens exactly where the answer starts to matter. The worked example on this page shows both, from the same model that produces your result.

The token factor, before the reward fees entered

          APR, rewards not restaked      H_g = 1 + y × T
APR, restaked n times a year   H_g = (1 + y / n)^(n × T)
APY, any reward handling       H_g = (1 + y)^T

The token factor, after the reward fees entered

          Rate already net of all fees   H_n = H_g
APR, not restaked              H_n = 1 + y × (1 − f) × T
APR, restaked                  H_n = [1 + (y / n) × (1 − f)]^(n × T)
APY, gross, no fee             H_n = H_g
APY, gross, fee f > 0          r_p = (1 + y)^(1 / n) − 1
                               H_n = [1 + r_p × (1 − f)]^(n × T)

The supply factor, and the answer

          Total token supply             S = (1 + s)^T
Share of the token supply      O = H_n / S
Change in that share           R_o = O − 1
The same, per year             a_o = O^(1 / T) − 1

What the symbols mean

y: the annual rate you entered, as a decimal
T: the holding period, in years
n: reward periods per year: 365, 52, 12, 4 or 1
f: the share of gross rewards withheld, from 0 to 1
s: your effective annual net change in the total token supply

The conventions this model fixes

APR: Nominal annual reward rate, before the restaking effect you select
APY: Effective annual token-growth rate; used directly and never compounded again
Reward fees: A share of rewards, never a charge against the balance
Gross APY with a fee: Converted to the implied periodic reward, fee deducted, then compounded
Supply basis: Your own effective annual net change in total token supply
Share of supply: Token factor divided by supply factor — never a subtraction
Money value: Token factor multiplied by the total price change you enter; kept separate
Lock-up: Liquidity comparison only; it changes no reward figure
Excluded: Slashing, missed rewards, withdrawal and network fees, tax, and all live data
Rounding: Display only; intermediate values remain unrounded

What this calculation leaves out

Slashing and missed rewards. Both are excluded, and deliberately: a single percentage could mean a one-off loss of principal, a probability-weighted expectation, an annual recurring loss, validator downtime, or missed rewards rather than lost principal. Those are five different models, and none of them is this one.
Every fee that is not a share of rewards. Withdrawal fees, network and gas costs, annual custody charges and fixed platform charges are all outside the model.
Anything that changes. The rate and the supply change you enter are held constant for the whole period. Real reward rates move with participation, emissions schedules and protocol governance.
Total against circulating supply. The tool takes one net figure for the total supply and does not model unlock schedules, treasury releases, bridged representations or rebasing token balances.
Liquid-staking mechanics. A liquid-staking token’s exchange rate against the asset it represents is not modelled, and a depeg is not a state this tool has.
Tax, in any jurisdiction. Every figure here is before tax and stays before tax.
Whether any of it is a good idea. The tool does not know what funds the reward, whether the rate lasts, whether the protocol is sound, whether the platform holds your tokens safely, or what the token does.

The companion explainer covers what this page calculates and what it cannot:staking rewards, fees and token dilution.

A worked example

An illustration, not a recommendation and not a typical case. No token is named, because nothing in the arithmetic depends on which one it is. Every figure below is produced by the same model that runs when you choose Calculate.

The assumptions
Advertised rate	12.00% APR
Quoted	Before the reward fee below
Reward handling	Restaked 12 times a year
Reward fee	10.00% of rewards
Holding period	1 year
Net annual token-supply change	8.00%
Starting token amount	1,000.00

What each of them does, over the whole period
Measure	End factor	Change
Token balance before the fee	1.1268	12.68%
Token balance after the fee	1.1135	11.35%
Total token supply	1.0800	8.00%
Your share of the token supply	1.0310	3.10%

The reward fee comes out of the rewards, so the balance grows 11.35% rather than 12.68%. The starting balance itself is untouched: at a 100% reward fee this factor would be exactly 1.0000, not zero.

Why the answer is a division and not a subtraction

The token balance grows 11.35% and the total supply grows 8.00%. Subtracting one from the other gives 3.35%. That is not the answer. Dividing the token factor by the supply factor gives 3.10% — a gap of 0.25% against the figure the subtraction suggests.

The gap is small here because both rates are small. It widens as either grows, and it widens fastest exactly where a reader is most likely to be relying on the shortcut: a large advertised rate against a large supply expansion.

What this example does not establish

A larger share of the token supply is not a gain in money terms, and it is not protection against anything. It says that this balance is a bigger fraction of the tokens in existence than it was. Whether that is worth having depends on what the token does, what funds the reward, whether the rate lasts and what the tokens are worth — none of which is in this calculation.The companion explainer is where those separations are set out in full.

Go deeper

Understand what the staking rate leaves out
Staking Rewards, Fees and Token Dilution Explained
Why staking can increase a token balance without increasing your share of the supply, how APR, APY and reward fees differ, and why ownership is a division rather than a subtraction.
Read the explainer: Staking Rewards, Fees and Token Dilution Explained

Numbers are only the start

Explore UBWHY analyses to see how costs, risks, liquidity and alternatives change a decision, and how UBWHY evaluates a product.

Calculation model and corrections

Calculation model: Staking Yield after Fees and Token Dilution v1.0
Last reviewed: 5 August 2026
APR: Nominal annual reward rate, before the restaking effect you select
APY: Effective annual token-growth rate; used directly and never compounded again
Reward fees: A share of rewards, never a charge against the balance
Gross APY with a fee: Converted to the implied periodic reward, fee deducted, then compounded
Supply basis: Your own effective annual net change in total token supply
Share of supply: Token factor divided by supply factor — never a subtraction
Money value: Token factor multiplied by the total price change you enter; kept separate
Lock-up: Liquidity comparison only; it changes no reward figure
Excluded: Slashing, missed rewards, withdrawal and network fees, tax, and all live data
Rounding: Display only; intermediate values remain unrounded

Correction history

Version 1.0 hardening review, 5 August 2026: cross-tool terminology, metadata, rule-ID, inheritance and validation alignment. Rule IDs were normalised from SY-I01 to SY-I-01. Relative token-supply-share change was locked as the sole primary decision outcome, and fee-adjusted token growth was reclassified from a co-primary to the primary supporting metric. The locked lock-rate help text was added, stating that the tool does not infer a higher reward tier from lock duration. No rate semantics, fee base, supply-factor definition or ownership formula changed, and no published result was affected — none existed.