Affiliate Marketing Statistics Updated November 2026

Human Written & Fact Checked · Updated

100 Affiliate Marketing Statistics for 2026

Before you quote an affiliate market figure, check what it counts. Advertiser spending, attributed sales, publisher income and platform revenue answer different questions. Treating them as interchangeable creates a market that exists only on paper.

Use this evidence hub to compare national market studies, program surveys and partner compensation. Each observation retains its geography and data period. These are benchmarks for investigation, not promises about the return any individual program will earn.

Headline figures

  • $113 billion: Affiliate-attributed ecommerce sales (United States; 2024). (Performance Marketing Association, Jun 2025)
  • 9.4%: Affiliate share of ecommerce sales (United States; 2024). (Performance Marketing Association, Jun 2025)
  • £1.78 billion: Affiliate and partnership investment (United Kingdom; 2025). (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £20.7 billion: Affiliate and partnership revenue (United Kingdom; 2025). (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 357 million: Tracked affiliate transactions (United Kingdom; 2025). (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 42%: Advertisers increasing affiliate spending (Australia; Mar–Apr 2026). (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 95%: Advertisers satisfied with affiliate ROI (Australia; Mar–Apr 2026). (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 66%: Publishers reporting revenue increases (Australia; Mar–Apr 2026). (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 74%: Brands increasing investment amid rising channel costs (Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey). (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 71%: Brands finding affiliate more cost-effective (Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey). (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 97%: Brands using AI in affiliate strategy (Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey). (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 26%: Creators preferring flat-fee compensation (Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey). (impact.com, Nov 2025)

Browse affiliate marketing statistics

How large is the US affiliate market?

Market totals become useful when you can see which businesses and transactions they cover. Sector returns also need their original denominator.

How did US investment and returns change?

US affiliate investment grew across the study period, with travel producing a higher attributed return per advertising dollar than retail. These returns do not establish that every attributed sale was incremental. For budgeting, keep the growth interval beside the reported return. A change measured across several years is not an annual growth rate. Likewise, attributed sales per advertising dollar do not deduct every operating cost or show the profit a brand retained. Evaluate margins and incremental demand separately before turning an industry benchmark into a target.

Which sectors received US affiliate spending?

Retail remained the largest spending category in the PMA study. The distribution measures advertiser investment instead of the number of affiliate websites. A spending share shows where money went within the study's defined market. It does not show how many consumers used affiliates, how much a publisher earned, or whether the category is underinvested. A useful comparison for your own program starts with the same sector definition and cost coverage, instead of assuming the national allocation is an optimal budget.

What pressure did US publishers report?

  • 54%: Publishers confident about their affiliate businesses. United States; 2025 report survey; fieldwork dates not disclosed in public release. (Performance Marketing Association, Jun 2025)
  • 69%: Publishers concerned about Google-related traffic and revenue disruption. United States; 2025 report survey; fieldwork dates not disclosed in public release. (Performance Marketing Association, Jun 2025)
  • 52%: Publishers planning experimentation with promotional formats. United States; 2025 report survey; fieldwork dates not disclosed in public release. (Performance Marketing Association, Jun 2025)

US publisher confidence coexisted with concerns about Google-driven traffic disruption. Reported plans to try other promotional formats describe intentions, not proof that diversification had already succeeded. Read confidence and concern together: they can coexist in the same business. The public release does not disclose enough fieldwork detail to turn these responses into a time series of publisher sentiment. Use them as questions for due diligence, then ask individual partners about traffic sources, commercial concentration and their own observed changes.

What does the UK market reveal about affiliate economics?

Read the UK findings as a defined retail-and-consumer-services market. Acquisition cost, transaction count and attributed revenue deserve separate columns.

How did spending and transactions change?

  • 7.3%: Annual affiliate investment growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £15 per £1: Affiliate ROI in retail and travel. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 1 in 5 pounds: Spending outside pure cost-per-acquisition models. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 3.5%: Total transaction growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 56%: Retail share of transactions. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 28%: Travel share of transactions. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 3%: Finance share of transactions. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 4%: Telecom share of transactions. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • -3%: Telecom transaction growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 7%: Finance transaction growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 9%: Travel transaction growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)

APMA combines network submissions with limited modelling. Sector transaction totals are rounded, so component shares may not add precisely to the total.

Where did UK sector investment and revenue concentrate?

  • 47%: Retail share of spending. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 48%: Health/beauty revenue growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 14%: Travel spending growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 10%: Travel revenue growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 62%: Travel sales via cashback/CLO/rewards. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 43%: Telecom spending via comparison sites. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 23%: Telecom spending via content publishers. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 9%: Finance spending growth. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 31%: Finance spending via content publishers. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £11.6 billion: Retail affiliate revenue. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £5.4 billion: Travel affiliate revenue. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £588 million: Cyber Weekend affiliate revenue. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • 7.5 million: Cyber Weekend affiliate transactions. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)

Retail and travel revenues use transaction values. Nominal finance and telecom values prevent comparable returns.

What did acquiring an affiliate sale cost?

  • £22.47: Telecom average commission/cost per sale. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £11.17: Finance average commission/cost per sale. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £4.44: Retail average commission/cost per sale. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)
  • £3.83: Travel average commission/cost per sale. United Kingdom; 2025. (APMA, Apr 2026)

APMA's average cost per sale includes commissions and fees. Differences in products and partner models prevent these sector averages from being universal commission recommendations. A commission benchmark is most useful when the purchased outcome is comparable. An insurance enquiry, a travel booking and an ordinary retail basket have different economics. Check whether a payment covers a lead, a completed sale, a placement or a combination before comparing it with your own program. A lower average acquisition cost does not by itself establish a better return.

How are affiliate programs organized and funded?

A survey of experienced practitioners is useful, but it is not a measure of every advertiser. Read the Australian findings with that sampling boundary in mind.

How are programs managed and measured?

  • 64%: Respondents expecting greater affiliate importance. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • Nearly 20%: Programs using multiple affiliate platforms. United States; April–June 2026 survey. (Performance Marketing Association, Jul 2026)
  • Almost 80%: Respondents using last-click attribution. United States; April–June 2026 survey. (Performance Marketing Association, Jul 2026)
  • Around 60%: Respondents putting first partnerships that influence AI search. United States; April–June 2026 survey. (Performance Marketing Association, Jul 2026)
  • 42%: Advertisers managing affiliate programs internally. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 27%: Advertisers using agencies for program management. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 29%: Advertisers using networks for program management. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)

US respondents commonly retained last-click attribution even while expanding their platform and AI-search strategies. The Australian management figures describe a different sample and cannot establish a cross-country difference.

Are budgets and publisher activity expanding?

  • Over 800: New impact.com clients in the quarter. Worldwide; Q1 2026 announcement. (impact.com, May 2026)
  • More than 2 million: Partnerships powered by impact.com. Worldwide; Q1 2026 announcement. (impact.com, May 2026)
  • 45%: Advertisers expecting spending increases. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 19%: Advertisers reporting spending decreases. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 72%: Publishers expanding advertiser relationships. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 41%: Tenancy-charging publishers raising placement fees. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 45%: Publishers earning half-plus revenue from affiliates. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 38%: Brands allocating 21–30% budgets to affiliate. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 73%: Brands reporting affiliate revenue growth. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)

Australian publishers reported expansion in revenue and advertiser relationships, while advertiser budget expectations remained mixed. Separately, impact.com disclosed platform growth; client and partnership counts are company metrics, not industry-wide adoption.

Why do advertisers choose affiliate marketing?

  • 57%: Advertisers citing cost effectiveness. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 55%: Advertisers citing performance-based ROI. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 54%: Advertisers citing incremental sales/customers. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 40%: Advertisers citing complementary paid-media benefits. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 38%: Advertisers citing scalability. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 37%: Advertisers citing audience reach. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 31%: Advertisers citing actionable analytics/tracking. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 28%: Advertisers citing niche audience access. Australia; Mar–Apr 2026. (IAB Australia, Apr 2026)
  • 66%: Brands reporting stronger affiliate ROAS. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)

Advertisers selected both commercial efficiency and audience-related reasons for using affiliates. These multi-select answers overlap; the impact.com effectiveness answers are reported perceptions instead of controlled comparisons.

Which partner models support different marketing goals?

Partner selection should follow the job you need done. Audience access and customer experience can matter even when the commercial agreement pays on conversion.

Which objectives do marketers associate with affiliates?

  • 46%: Marketers identifying measurement of marketing spend value as an affiliate-supported objective. Europe and United States; Late 2024 survey. (Forrester Consulting / Awin, Jun 2025)
  • 50%: Marketers putting first improved customer experiences. Europe and United States; Late 2024 survey. (Forrester Consulting / Awin, Jun 2025)

Personalization and customer experience were prominent affiliate-supported objectives in the Forrester follow-up. A fresh sample was surveyed, so changes from an earlier study cannot be attributed to the same respondents changing their minds. Objectives describe the problem a marketer hopes a channel will solve. They are different from a measured result after a campaign. When using this evidence in a business case, specify the desired customer experience and how it will be evaluated. A partner that expands discovery may need different success criteria from a partner whose main role is completing an existing purchase journey.

Which partners and benefits were reported?

These results separate the types of partners used from benefits marketers said they realized. They are not interchangeable measures of partner effectiveness.

How do compensation preferences differ?

The payment method determines who carries the risk before a sale. The impact.com survey distinguishes what partners receive from what they would prefer.

Which payment models do brands use?

  • 38%: Brands using pay-per-sale compensation. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 33%: Brands using pay-per-click compensation. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 30%: Brands using hybrid compensation. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)

Brands can use multiple compensation models simultaneously. These responses describe adoption instead of budget share. These arrangements allocate risk differently. Payment for a click rewards traffic before a conversion is known; payment for a sale depends on a completed transaction; a hybrid agreement combines a guaranteed component with performance compensation. That distinction counts when a partner invests in content before any sale occurs. The adoption percentages do not tell you how much of a brand's total budget went to each arrangement.

What compensation do partners want?

  • 19%: Creators receiving flat-fee compensation. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 42%: Publishers preferring cost-per-click compensation. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 28%: Publishers receiving cost-per-click compensation. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 47%: Publishers putting first income diversification. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)

Creators and publishers answered separate questions about current and preferred compensation. Income diversification is a separate publisher goal, not another payment category. A preference gap is a negotiation signal, not proof that either side has chosen the wrong model. Partners may value predictability while advertisers value measurable outcomes. Compare the work required, the time before payment, the attribution rules and any cancellation conditions. Because these are separate questions about actual and preferred arrangements, the percentages should not be subtracted from a budget allocation.

How is AI changing affiliate work?

Overall AI uptake tells you little about the workflow being changed. The useful comparison is between concrete tasks and clearly defined respondent groups.

Where are brands using AI?

  • 35%: Brands using customer-support AI chatbots. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 33%: Brands using predictive AI analytics. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 32%: Brands using AI partner-performance analysis. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)

Brands reported applying AI to customer support, prediction and partner analysis. These uses concern affiliate strategy; they do not measure AI spending or prove that adopting a tool increased program returns. A tool can support several stages of the same program without replacing the entire workflow. Separate customer-facing support from internal analysis when evaluating deployment. Also distinguish whether a team has tried a feature, uses it regularly or relies on it for business-critical decisions. This survey's use-case answers do not provide that depth of operational evidence, so they should not be labelled as daily or autonomous use.

How are publishers and creators applying AI?

  • 96%: Creators using AI. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 87%: Publishers using AI. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 41%: Publishers using AI for content. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 35%: Publishers automating affiliate workflows using AI. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 29%: Publishers personalizing content/offers using AI. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 26%: Creators translating/subtitling with AI. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 26%: Creators creating visuals/videos using AI. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)
  • 25%: Creators generating content ideas using AI. Eight-market survey; Mid-2025 survey. (impact.com, Nov 2025)

Publishers reported using AI for content and operational workflows, while creators also used it for translation and visual production. The two groups have separate sample bases and overlapping use-case responses.

Glossary

Methodology and sources

Every figure on this page comes from the organisation that produced it: regulators, statistics offices, public bodies, research institutes, and companies reporting their own data or surveys. Each one links to the original report or dataset and carries its release date. Survey results keep their population and fieldwork period, and financial figures keep the measure the producer used. Figures from different producers are not added together or ranked against each other. The page is reviewed monthly and updated when a producer releases newer data.