Two plan types, one engine, and payout math that never contradicts itself.
Hybrid plan software for compensation structures that combine two or more base plan types, binary plus matrix, unilevel plus board, or a combination unique to you, built as one coherent engine, not two systems bolted together with duct tape.
Same vetting bar either way, whether we staff the project or fill the seat. See the rubric
Two or more tree shapes coexisting per distributor.
One commission run, multiple plan formulas, no conflicts.
Explicit ordering when plan components could overlap.
Automated, auditable multi-component payout runs.
What we build for hybrid plans.
Most hybrid plans track more than one relationship per distributor, a binary placement position and a separate unilevel sponsor line, for example. We model these as distinct, correctly-linked structures rather than forcing one tree to represent two different relationships.
Each plan component (pair bonus, level override, matrix cycle, board completion, whichever combination is yours) computed in the same run, against the same source volume. Clear precedence rules cover anywhere the components could otherwise double-count the same sale.
Hybrid plans fail most often at the seams, a rank change that affects one component but not another, a distributor who's active in the binary side but inactive in the unilevel side. We map and test these seams explicitly instead of discovering them in a live payout run.
One dashboard showing every component of a distributor's earnings, binary pair bonus, level overrides, matrix cycles, whatever applies, broken out clearly so it reads as one coherent statement, not several unrelated numbers.
Current tools, not last year's.
The nearest thing we've actually shipped.
Real-time dispatch platform
A real-time platform coordinating multiple interdependent systems at 12,000 transactions a day without state drifting out of sync, the same coordination discipline a multi-component comp plan needs.
On camera, in their own words.
Why he brought his development work to Code Elevator.
Scoped fast. Shipped on a real timeline.
Building something adjacent?
Answered before you ask.
Binary plus matrix and unilevel plus board are the most common combinations we see, but the engine is designed around whatever components your plan actually has. We map yours specifically rather than starting from a fixed combination.
The individual formulas are usually no harder than a standalone plan, the real work is the seams: what happens when a rule from one component conflicts with, or should defer to, a rule from another. That mapping and testing is where the extra time goes, and it's time we don't recommend skipping.
That's the specific failure mode we design against. Every source volume event is tagged and consumed by precedence rules so it contributes to each component exactly as your plan intends, never twice by accident.
Yes. It is worth scoping the eventual full structure upfront even if you launch with one component first. Retrofitting a second plan type onto genealogy data that was not modeled for it is more work than building it in from the start.
Every way out of this build is already written down.
Code, prompts, models and pipelines: all work-product IP assigns to you by contract from day one, not on final payment.
Nothing is locked to us or to a proprietary platform you can't leave. You get the repository, the documentation, and full access.
Bring us your hybrid structure. We'll tell you what's realistic.
We'll map every component and every seam between them, then show you the audit trail behind every payout across the whole plan.
We reply within an hour during our working day in India and the UAE.