Spotify payouts

[Drew Stephenson]

I'm in the process of shifting distributor from Ditto to SOSFA / LANDR but I'm trying to sort out some royalty payments first and I wanted to check what other independent artists are currently seeing.

Issue 1
I have 61 tracks on Spotify and, according to Spotify for Artists (SFA) these have all had over 1000 plays in the last 12 months with a total of 131k streams.
According to my Ditto stats the last 12 months have 128k Spotify streams.
Averaging about 10k streams a month with an upward trajectory.
I'm not too bothered about that minor level of discrepancy.

But...

When it comes to royalties, I have only had a payment from Spotify for the months of April and May this year (nothing for June), despite having all my songs over the 1000 plays-per-year threshold for most of the year.
I've chased this repeatedly with Ditto, including again this morning, and they just keep replying with vague comments about some streams not qualifying and talking about the 1000 streams pa qualifying limit.
But according to the royalty data for June, not a single one of 13k streams was eligible for monetisation.

So question one: is anyone else seeing such a high percentage of streams receiving zero royalties?

Issue 2
This regards the actual payment rate.
Firstly, let me state that I categorically understand that there is not a fixed payment per stream and it's a total royalty pot divided by a number of streams.

But...
Up to the point where I stopped getting royalties, my effective rate from Spotify had been between £0.003 and £0.004 per stream.
In the two months that I've actually had some royalty payments this year, it's been £4.70 for 3,404 streams and £2.56 for 1,814 streams. Ignoring the fact that these are a fraction of the reported streams (see issue 1) that gives an effective payout rate of £0.0014.
I also know that Spotify have introduced 'bundling' this year that has affected payout rates by including audiobooks and podcasts into the same royalty pool, but I've not read of anyone else seeing this kind of drop off in payment.

So question two: has anyone else seen a similar drop in effective per-stream payments?

All experiences and thoughts welcome but specific answers to the questions especially so!
Thank you in advance.

[James Perrett]

What country are we talking about? Ad funded or premium?

The country that the listener subscribes from makes a big difference.

[Philbo King]

I've resigned myself to acknowledging that my Spotify royalties will reach the tidy sum of one dollar roughly around the time the Andromeda galaxy merges with the Milky Way in 4 to 5 billion years.

[Drew Stephenson]

What country are we talking about?

Most of my Spotify listeners are UK and USA, with a few scattered across the rest of the anglosphere are around western Europe.

Ad funded or premium?

I can't see that from my stats I don't think.

[Drew Stephenson]

I've resigned myself to acknowledging that my Spotify royalties will reach the tidy sum of one dollar roughly around the time the Andromeda galaxy merges with the Milky Way in 4 to 5 billion years.

I used to be fairly phlegmatic about these things too but with my numbers growing over the last 12 months I should be looking at £100 - £300, not £5.40
That's a difference worth investigating I reckon.

[OneWorld]

………………..
Up to the point where I stopped getting royalties, my effective rate from Spotify had been between £0.003 and £0.004 per stream.
In the two months that I've actually had some royalty payments this year, it's been £4.70 for 3,404 streams and £2.56 for 1,814 streams. Ignoring the fact that these are a fraction of the reported streams (see issue 1) that gives an effective payout rate of £0.0014.
I also know that Spotify have introduced 'bundling' this year that has affected payout rates by including audiobooks and podcasts into the same royalty pool, but I've not read of anyone else seeing this kind of drop off in payment.

So question two: has anyone else seen a similar drop in effective per-stream payments?

All experiences and thoughts welcome but specific answers to the questions especially so!
Thank you in advance.

Goodness me, ever get the feeling you’ve been had?

[James Perrett]

The last statement that I can see here is from March where Spotify paid anything from $0.006 for a UK premium stream down to $0.000008 per track for a Ukranian ad funded stream.

However, the amounts vary widely, even for the same type of stream, so I have no idea how this is all worked out.

[amanise]

Your 0.0014 rate is very close to what I've always had on Spotify streams via CD Baby. Another US distributor. Last time I got a cheque was over 15 years ago, which I framed without cashing. Since then, every time I approach my payment threshold they raise it. Now, my Spotify numbers just display "Spotify Ineligible " at a rate of 0.000000. So relax! You're raking it in!

I have yet to see any numbers on my 8 SOSFA smasheroos. I'm expecting zeros, for all the reasons already banged on about elsewhere.

[merlyn]

... But according to the royalty data for June, not a single one of 13k streams was eligible for monetisation. ...

They must be fair use streams.

[Drew Stephenson]

très drôle

[ken long]

I have only had a payment from Spotify for the months of April and May this year (nothing for June), despite having all my songs over the 1000 plays-per-year threshold for most of the year.

Doesn't it also have to do with number of unique listeners?

Starting in April 2024, tracks must have reached a threshold of at least 1,000 streams in the previous 12 months to be included in the recorded music royalty pool calculation.

There's also a minimum number of unique listeners required for a track to become eligible to ensure users can’t game the system by streaming the track hundreds of times in order to qualify. We don't share this number publicly to prevent further manipulation by bad actors.

https://support.spotify.com/us/artists/ ... igibility/

[Drew Stephenson]

Doesn't it also have to do with number of unique listeners?

There's also a minimum number of unique listeners required for a track to become eligible to ensure users can’t game the system by streaming the track hundreds of times in order to qualify. We don't share this number publicly to prevent further manipulation by bad actors.

https://support.spotify.com/us/artists/ ... igibility/

Ah, I didn't know that. I've generally had between 3-500 listeners a month so that would suggest some folks are listening a fair bit, as usual there are a couple of tracks with many more listens than the rest, but perhaps that's it. Not reaching a broad enough audience.
Thank you.

[Sam Spoons]

I have only had a payment from Spotify for the months of April and May this year (nothing for June), despite having all my songs over the 1000 plays-per-year threshold for most of the year.

Doesn't it also have to do with number of unique listeners?

Starting in April 2024, tracks must have reached a threshold of at least 1,000 streams in the previous 12 months to be included in the recorded music royalty pool calculation.

There's also a minimum number of unique listeners required for a track to become eligible to ensure users can’t game the system by streaming the track hundreds of times in order to qualify. We don't share this number publicly to prevent further manipulation by bad actors.

https://support.spotify.com/us/artists/ ... igibility/

That sounds to me like just another way to avoid paying out...

[ken long]

Years of cheap and accessible digital distribution has encouraged anyone and their mom to try and monetise their music. While Spotify's change of rules regarding payouts is another blow to smaller, already struggling artists, the bottom line is that people want to get paid for content nobody really wants. And that's seldom brought up in these arguments.

[Drew Stephenson]

To Sam's point, I can completely understand why Spotify are protective of the thresholds they use, after all, anything that's understood can be gamed, but they no longer have a reputation as one of the good guys and things like this just make them less transparent and less trustworthy.

Ken is completely right as well, there's a surplus of supply and listeners have ever reducing free time and ever more ways in which they can spend it. Hence the vast majority of songs on Spotify have fewer than a dozen plays.

Just to bring this full circle, Ditto have just updated my dashboard with some June figures from Spotify: £5.24 from 3,095 streams - so £0.0017 per stream and the bulk of the plays still not qualifying. So obviously there was a bit of a delay with their numbers this month and I still need to go and find more listeners.

[James Perrett]

I think Spotify are feeling the pinch. They have finally announced lossless streaming.

https://newsroom.spotify.com/2025-09-10 ... xperience/

From their website:

When can I start listening?
Lossless is rolling out gradually to more than 50 markets through October. Premium subscribers in Australia, Austria, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, the US, and the UK have already started to get access.

[amanise]

Years of cheap and accessible digital distribution has encouraged anyone and their mom to try and monetise their music. While Spotify's change of rules regarding payouts is another blow to smaller, already struggling artists, the bottom line is that people want to get paid for content nobody really wants. And that's seldom brought up in these arguments.

That certainly chimes with my experience. I don't see any way around it, it's just one of those awkward truths that sits there like a massive grey animal with a trunk, tusks, and huge ears in the corner of the room. Watching everything you try and do, and chuckling quietly to itself.

[ken long]

I don't see any way around it

Nor me. And writing more popular music doesn't solve this. The platform is set up for big labels not their artists and not for small, independent artists/bands. Difficult to get new, unique listeners when your music doesn't get exposed to them via the algorithm.

[amanise]

I don't see any way around it

Nor me. And writing more popular music doesn't solve this. The platform is set up for big labels not their artists and not for small, independent artists/bands. Difficult to get new, unique listeners when your music doesn't get exposed to them via the algorithm.

But, for someone like me, it was always like this - and so nothing has really changed. Even a couple of Billion years ago when I was young and much more visually appealing, the doors of the industry remained firmly shut no matter how hard I banged on them. The format of the exclusion has changed, but it's still total exclusion. It's why I don't mind when people criticise my work for being too old fashioned with no current public appeal. The only person to ever worry about pleasing has been myself really. Turns out there was no need to worry about the demise of 'the labels' - they looked after themselves perfectly.

[Drew Stephenson]

Just a quick update on issue 2 now that July's payments have come through.
1,957 qualifying plays (out of 14k actual plays) for £3.08 gives a per stream of £0.0015/play. So still going down and nowhere near where it was a year ago.
Is anyone else getting this as well?

[IAA]

anyone else getting this as well?

Sorry can’t confirm or deny Drew, not in the big time just yet.



Ian

[amanise]

Yes, but that per stream figure is what I've always had from Spotify - for me it's never been higher than that.

[Drew Stephenson]

Yes, but that per stream figure is what I've always had from Spotify - for me it's never been higher than that.

Interesting. Weird but interesting.

[James Perrett]

I've just signed up for Landr distribution so it will be interesting to see how their reporting compares to what I'm used to from the other distributor that I deal with who give an almost fully itemised report.

[amanise]

Yes, but that per stream figure is what I've always had from Spotify - for me it's never been higher than that.

Interesting. Weird but interesting.

I get even less for YouTube streams