YouTube Long-Form vs Shorts Revenue: A Direct Comparison for US Creators

The per-view revenue difference between long-form and Shorts is the most important number in this comparison:

Long-form US RPM: $5-$8 average (range: $2-$40+)
Shorts US RPM: $0.04-$0.10 average (range: $0.02-$0.15)

This means long-form content earns roughly 50-100x more per view than Shorts. To illustrate:

| View Count | Long-Form Revenue ($7 RPM) | Shorts Revenue ($0.07 RPM) |
|---|---|---|
| 10,000 views | $70 | $0.70 |
| 100,000 views | $700 | $7 |
| 1,000,000 views | $7,000 | $70 |
| 10,000,000 views | $70,000 | $700 |

A long-form video with 100,000 views ($700) earns the same as a Short with 10,000,000 views ($700). This 100:1 ratio is not an exaggeration — it reflects the structural differences in how each format is monetized.

The reason: long-form videos display multiple ads (pre-roll, mid-roll, post-roll, display, overlay) with viewers watching for minutes. Shorts display shared feed ads with viewers watching for seconds. The ad inventory and attention per view are fundamentally different.

Despite the massive RPM disadvantage, Shorts have compensating strengths:

Reach and discovery: YouTube's algorithm pushes Shorts far more aggressively to non-subscribers. A typical Short reaches 5-20x more unique viewers than a typical long-form video on the same channel. Shorts appear in the Shorts shelf, on the homepage, and in external app recommendations.

Subscriber acquisition: Shorts convert viewers to subscribers at higher rates than long-form content because the commitment to watch is minimal. Channels that post daily Shorts often grow subscribers 3-5x faster than channels posting only long-form content.

Production efficiency: A Short takes 15-60 minutes to produce (or minutes with AI tools like FluxNote). A quality long-form video takes 5-40 hours. The time-adjusted revenue calculation shifts in Shorts' favor when you account for production time.

Time-adjusted comparison example:
- Creator A: Spends 20 hours making 1 long-form video that earns $700 (100K views). That is $35/hour.
- Creator B: Spends 5 hours making 10 Shorts that earn $70 total (1M total views). That is $14/hour.
- Creator C: Spends 1 hour using AI tools to make 10 Shorts that earn $70 total. That is $70/hour.

The production method dramatically affects which format is more efficient. AI-generated Shorts can actually beat long-form on a per-hour basis despite the RPM gap.

Top-performing US creators in 2026 use a dual-format strategy:

Shorts as the growth engine:
Post 3-7 Shorts per week to maximize algorithmic reach and subscriber growth. Treat Shorts ad revenue as a minor bonus — the real value is audience building. Each Short should include a hook that relates to your long-form content.

Long-form as the revenue engine:
Post 1-3 long-form videos per week (8-20 minutes each) with mid-roll ads enabled. This is where 80-90% of your ad revenue comes from. Optimize titles, thumbnails, and retention for maximum views.

The funnel in practice:
1. Short reaches 500K viewers → 2,000 subscribe
2. New subscribers see long-form content in their feed
3. Long-form video gets 100K views → $700 in ad revenue
4. Total Shorts ad revenue from 500K views: $35
5. But the Shorts effectively "bought" those $700-earning long-form viewers for $0

Revenue allocation for a channel doing both:
- Long-form ad revenue: 85-92% of total YouTube ad income
- Shorts ad revenue: 8-15% of total YouTube ad income

Creators who try to earn primarily from Shorts ad revenue are fighting the math. Creators who use Shorts strategically to grow their long-form audience get the best of both worlds.