YouTube Shorts RPM Benchmarks

What does a million views on YouTube Shorts actually pay in 2025—and why are some creators reporting pennies while others pull in $5+ RPM?

As Shorts now drive over 200 billion daily views worldwide, the question of monetization is no longer hypothetical. Creators and agencies alike want to know what realistic revenue per thousand views looks like across niches, formats, and geographies.

RPM, not CPM, is the real benchmark. While advertisers may pay double-digit CPMs, creators often see a fraction of that in their dashboards. The spread is wide—finance Shorts can yield RPMs 10x higher than comedy or lifestyle, while video length, music licensing, and regional traffic mix further skew outcomes.

This article breaks down the latest Shorts RPM benchmarks, real creator ranges, and strategic levers that determine whether Shorts is a side hustle or a serious revenue stream.

RPM vs CPM: Why Creators Should Focus on RPM

When building a revenue forecast or benchmarking performance, creators often get confused by the terms CPM and RPM. The difference matters even more in the context of Shorts, where ad delivery mechanics differ from long-form.

In this section, we'll break down both metrics, how they relate (and diverge), and why RPM is the more meaningful KPI for creators.

What CPM Means — and Why You’ll Often See It First

• CPM stands for “Cost Per Mille” (cost per 1,000 ad impressions). It’s what advertisers pay YouTube (or Google Ads) to place their ads.
• CPM is often quoted in industry media or ad dashboards because it signals advertiser demand and competition.
• But CPM doesn’t reflect how much of that goes to the creator: it’s a gross metric, before platform cuts, ad fill rates, and revenue sharing.

Because CPM is advertiser-facing, it can fluctuate wildly depending on ad inventory, brand budgets, seasonality, and niche targeting. In one niche, advertisers might bid $20 CPM; in another, just $2.

Enter RPM: The Creator’s True Yardstick

• RPM (Revenue Per Mille) is what the creator actually earns per 1,000 views (or “engaged views”), after all deductions.
• On YouTube, RPM calculations take into account:
  • YouTube’s share (i.e. platform cut)
  • Which views were monetized (not every view leads to an ad)
  • Other revenue sources included (for long form, e.g. YouTube Premium, memberships, etc.)
• In the context of Shorts, YouTube specifically calculates RPM per 1,000 engaged views.
• Thus, RPM is always lower than the CPM that advertisers pay — sometimes dramatically lower.

Because RPM is net to the creator, it more accurately reflects what your content and channel are worth. Using CPM to forecast earnings can lead to major overestimation.

Turning CPM to RPM: A Sample Math Walkthrough

Let’s say an advertiser pays $10 CPM for ad impressions in your niche. But:

1. Only 50% of your Shorts’ views yield ad impressions (due to fill rates, ad auction, region mismatch).
2. YouTube takes 45% (some sources differ; long-form usually splits 55% to creators, 45% to YouTube).
3. Some ad types or country segments underpay or skip entirely.

So your actual RPM might be:

$$\text{RPM}=\mathrm{\$}10\times 0.50\times (1-0.45)=\mathrm{\$}10\times 0.50\times 0.55=\mathrm{\$}2.75$$

But in reality, for Shorts, some creators report RPMs far lower (because monetization is pooled, not per-video) — e.g., many report $0.05–$0.20 RPMs.

In Digiday interviews, several creators said their Shorts RPMs consistently land under $0.20, while their long-form videos often clock in at $3–$6+ RPM in the same niche.

Why Shorts Break the Standard CPM → RPM Logic

The Shorts monetization model diverges from long-form in several ways:

• Pooled revenue model: Rather than ads being directly tied to each Short, advertiser spend across Shorts is pooled and distributed among creators based on their share of views. This means you don’t need an ad to play on your particular Short to earn revenue, but you also get diluted returns. 
• Higher YouTube share/platform “efficiency” cut: Some analyses suggest YouTube may take a steeper effective cut on Shorts monetization to manage risk in the emerging format. 
• Lower ad inventory per video: Because Shorts are short and frequently consumed rapidly, fewer ads are available per video slot compared to long-form. Even if ad inventory exists, not every view triggers one.
• Regional and niche disparity: CPMs in high-income countries are much higher, but Shorts viewership is global and often skewed toward regions with lower ad bids. So your RPM average gets pulled down by lower-paying geos.

Key Takeaways

• CPM ≠ RPM: CPM is advertiser pay; RPM is what you actually take home.
• In Shorts, the gap is wider because of pooling, diluted ad allocation, and higher platform cuts.
• As a creator or agency, always benchmark using RPM (or engaged RPM) — not CPM — when modeling viability or revenue forecasts.
• Use industry-sourced RPM ranges (covered later) rather than extrapolating from advertiser metrics.

Niches & Video Length Effects on Shorts RPM

In the world of monetization, not all Shorts are created equal. Two of the most powerful levers under your control are niche (topic vertical) and video length/format choices. These variables materially influence your RPM (revenues per 1,000 engaged views).

How Niche Impacts RPM in Shorts

Some niches command higher advertiser demand and better RPM even in Shorts, while others struggle with ultra-thin margins. Because Shorts monetization is pooled, your niche’s overall demand shapes how much of that pool you get.

High-RPM niches (relative to Shorts):

• Finance, investing, business education — because advertisers in these verticals tend to have larger budgets and are willing to pay for high-value actions.
• Software, SaaS, B2B tools, productivity — similar logic (ad budgets, intent)
• Health/wellness/fitness, when tied to products or services
• Tech/gadgets/reviews (if the video pulls in engaged, qualified audiences)

Lower-RPM / volume niches:

• Entertainment, memes, viral clips, pets, comedy — these often get massive view counts but lower monetization yield per view.
• Cooking, DIY, crafts — strong for reach but advertisers in those verticals tend to pay less.
• “Broad” general interest — unless heavily targeted, can suffer in RPM.

A Reddit thread discussion reported an average Shorts RPM of $0.09 in a cooking / “mom life” niche (i.e., relatively low monetization vertical). 

Analytics aggregator “Is This Channel Monetized?” suggests that typical Shorts RPMs fall between $0.05 and $0.09, with “high” Shorts RPMs near $0.15 in strong niches. 

It’s critical to emphasize: Just because a niche is popular (lots of views), it doesn’t guarantee high RPM. The advertiser demand curve is what matters. Thus, creators who choose niches with both audience appeal and ad demand will tend to do better in Shorts monetization over time.

Video Length Effects: Short vs Borderline “Longer” Shorts

YouTube recently expanded the maximum length for Shorts from 60 seconds to 3 minutes. That shift opens a new dimension of experiment: is a “long Shorts” (2–3 minutes) better monetarily than super-short ones (15–60s)? The short answer: sometimes, but with caveats.

Advantages of longer Shorts (e.g. up to 3 minutes)

• More watch time potential: If viewers stay, total watch minutes are higher, which can make your content more “valuable” in algorithmic and ad allocation terms.
• Amenable to more complex topics: Allows more narrative or explanation, which in higher-RPM niches (finance, education) can translate into better engagement and ad yield.
• Potential to edge toward mid-roll-like behavior (Though not exactly mid-roll ads), especially if retention is strong.

Some creators speculate that longer Shorts help “bridge” the gap toward long-form metrics. But caution is required: the algorithm and ad system might still favor shorter, high-retention loops. One commentary piece flags the risk that longer Shorts may dilute engagement or suffer retention dropoff in the Shorts feed.

Risks and downsides of pushing length

• Retention dropoff: Many viewers on Shorts are conditioned to expect quick, snappy content. If your 2-3 minute Short loses viewers halfway, your average watch percentage falls, which could hurt your weighting in ad distribution.
• Algorithm bias: It's unclear whether the Shorts feed algorithm will promote longer Shorts the same way it does 15–60 second ones.
• Diluted repeatability: Super-short Shorts can loop, rewatch, or be consumed repeatedly. Longer ones may not enjoy that reuse effect.
• Monetization eligibility quirks: YouTube’s Shorts monetization rules specify that only Shorts uploaded after October 15, 2024, with up to 3 minutes are eligible under the Shorts revenue sharing model. 

Anecdotally, many creators still default to 30–60 second Shorts. In one analysis of 5,400 Shorts, the most common duration was 30–40 seconds. Interestingly, Shorts near 50–60 seconds had the highest average views, though not necessarily proven to have the highest RPM. 

Interaction: Niche + Length Tradeoffs & Tactics

• In high-RPM niches, experimenting with longer Shorts may yield disproportionate returns (if retention holds). For example, a 2-minute explainer in finance might push more ad dollars than a 30-second tip.
• In low-RPM niches, your optimal play is often to maximize volume through shorter, trendable, snackable content rather than trying to eke more ad yield by stretching length.
• Always monitor retention curves: if your 2-minute Shorts bleed audience heavily in the last 30 seconds, the yield may drop.
• Use A/B tests: for the same topic, make a 30s Short and a 120s Short; compare RPM, watch time, retention, and views.

Music, Licensing & Content Type Impact on Shorts RPM

When it comes to monetizing Shorts, music is one of the biggest wildcards. Because so much Shorts content uses background music or trending audio, the policies around licensing, claims, and revenue splits directly shape how much a creator can earn.

YouTube’s Music / Licensing Model for Shorts (2025)

YouTube no longer just lets creators slap any charting song onto their Shorts without consequences. Under the current Shorts monetization model:

• If your Short uses no music, 100% of the ad revenue tied to that Short’s views goes into the Creator Pool.
• If your Short uses one music track, roughly 50% of the ad revenue (from that Short’s engaged views) is allocated to the music rights holders, and the remaining 50% goes to the Creator Pool.
• If you use two tracks, then about 66% goes to music licenses, and only ~34% enters the Creator Pool. 
• Regardless of music usage, creators receive 45% of their allocated share from the revenue in the Creator Pool.

That means, even if your Short is among the top 1% of engaged Shorts in your geography, using music cuts down the total “pie” you draw from.

YouTube clarifies that when calculating revenue splits, engaged views across monetizing creators are summed per country, and your share is proportional to your engaged views — but the pool is net of music licensing costs.

Music Eligibility & Claim Policies: What You Must Know

Because of the sensitive nature of music rights, YouTube has also introduced rules to prevent misuse:

• Shorts that are longer than 60 seconds and contain copyrighted music may be blocked from monetization or even blocked from viewing altogether. 
• When uploading a 1–3 minute Short, if a Content ID claim is found (i.e., copyrighted audio detected), the Short can be blocked until the claim is resolved. 
• The Shorts creation interface gives access to a shorts-audio library of tracks pre-licensed for use in Shorts. If you use one of those, a special (non-disputable) Content ID claim is attached, just to track usage — you don’t necessarily lose monetization due to that claim. 
• But if you use music outside of that library or source tracks manually, the full gamut of copyright claims, strikes, or demonetization risks applies. 

In short, YouTube is balancing openness to music use with stricter content control. Some creators say the ambiguity and delays in claim queues are pain points.

Impact on RPM: How Music Cuts Into Earnings

Because of the licensing split, using music can reduce your effective RPM, even if views and engagement are strong. Here’s how:

• Suppose your Short generates $1,000 in ad revenue (raw) via the Shorts feed. If it has no music, the full $1,000 contributes to the pool. If it has one track, $500 is diverted to music licensing, leaving $500 for the Creator Pool.
• If you contributed 5% of total engaged views that month, you get 5% of the remaining pool, then 45% of that, reducing your take.
• In contrast, a no-music Short with the same view share yields more because it doesn’t get taxed by music splits.

Thus, in practice, performers who rely heavily on trending tracks or chart hits may see their RPM coerced downward compared to “no-music” or custom/royalty-free audio content.

Real Example & Hypothetical Tension

Consider a finance creator who publishes two Shorts:

• Short A: 45 seconds, no background music.
• Short B: 45 seconds, with a popular chart track (licensed via YouTube’s library).

If both garner identical engaged views, Short A’s revenue contribution to the Creator Pool is 100%; Short B’s is ~50%. Even though the engagement is equal, Short A nets twice the effective share — before applying the 45% creator split.

Now, imagine the music is so “viral” that it boosts view count on B by 20–30%. That bump might offset the royalty cut — but the tradeoff is uncertain. Some creators test this by running blended content: half their Shorts with safe/royalty-free audio, half with trending music, then comparing RPM.

Strategic Tips & Best Practices

1. Favor royalty-free/custom audio for content in tighter niches where each dollar matters.
2. Use music sparingly in high-RPM niches — if the bump in views is minimal, you lose more than you gain via licensing cuts.
3. Test vs control: upload pairs of Shorts (one with music, one without) on same topic, and compare RPM over 30–60 days.
4. Watch retention patterns — if the music causes dips in audience attention or replays, the net value may shrink further.
5. Track your claim resolution times — if claims are slow or stay unresolved, revenue could be held back.

The Real Value of Shorts RPM in 2025

YouTube Shorts may have unlocked explosive scale with 200B daily views, but monetization remains a game of nuance. This article showed why RPM—not CPM—should be the benchmark creators and agencies rely on, how niches and video length reshape earnings potential, and why music licensing choices can directly eat into payouts.

The data makes one thing clear: Shorts are powerful for reach, but RPMs still trail behind long-form, with most creators seeing pennies per thousand views unless they operate in high-demand niches. That doesn’t make Shorts a bad bet—it means creators must treat RPM as a diagnostic tool, not a guaranteed paycheck.

For creators, the play is to experiment with formats, monitor RPM by niche, and build sustainable monetization stacks beyond ads. For agencies, the smart move is to forecast campaign ROI on RPM ranges, not CPM promises.

Shorts in 2025 are about volume plus strategy: scale matters, but only if you optimize for the right levers. Those who treat RPM as a compass, not a fixed rate card, will be the ones who turn fleeting Shorts into lasting revenue.

About the Author

Kalin Anastasov

Writer

Kalin Anastasov plays a pivotal role as an content manager and editor at Influencer Marketing Hub. He expertly applies his SEO and content writing experience to enhance each piece, ensuring it aligns with our guidelines and delivers unmatched quality to our readers.