Performance-based is the umbrella. Under it sit the three results a brand can pay on:
- Sales: a percentage of attributed orders or a fixed amount per order. This is commission in the usual sense, and the per-order version is a CPA deal, cost per acquisition, as ad platforms define it (Google).
- Ad spend: a percentage of what the brand spends running the creator’s video as an ad.
- Views: a set amount per 1,000 views of the creator’s organic post.
The common thread is that the brand’s cost tracks an outcome it cares about, and the creator’s income tracks what their video did. HourlyUGC‘s own writing frames the ad spend version as the model the market is moving to, because it aligns the two sides (HourlyUGC).
Example. A brand offers a creator a choice: $200 flat, or $50 plus 15 % of sales through a code plus 10 % of ad spend. The creator takes the second. The code brings 30 orders of $40, so $180. The brand runs the video as an ad with $1,500 behind it, so $150. Total $380, against $200 flat. A different creator’s video brings 4 orders and never runs as an ad: $50 plus $24. Example numbers, not a benchmark and not a promise.
When brands use it. The pain this answers: “We paid an influencer a flat fee for one post and got nothing.” Brands use performance pay when they can track results and want cost to scale with success. Most pair it with a small base so creators will take the risk, and all of them need a written rule for how results are counted.
The creator’s view. Performance pay is a bet on the video and on the brand’s tracking. Before taking it, a creator should ask for the attribution rule, the window, the reporting, and a floor. The FTC’s disclosure rules apply to every performance post, because a commission is a material connection.
Try it on HourlyUGC. HourlyUGC supports all three results, a share of sales, a share of ad spend (Meta today) and pay per 1,000 views, alone or on top of an hourly or per-video base. Next step: start a campaign on HourlyUGC.