What this report settles
Published rate cards for beauty and supplement creators disagree by two orders of magnitude, and one publisher contradicts itself across its own pages. The single dataset built on confirmed deals rather than asking prices puts the micro median at $1,000 with a 25th percentile of $480, which means most brands anchor on a ceiling and negotiate down from it.
Everything on this page is drawn from the report itself. The examples are real and the figures are the ones inside it.
The questions below are answered in full. The rest of the report opens as soon as you tell us who you are.
Confirmed-deal figures come from the one dataset built on closed deals rather than asking prices, 294 in total. Published rate-card ranges are reproduced as published, including where they conflict. Every number on this page is an observed benchmark from the ad set described above. None of it is a projection, and none of it is a performance QuickAds is promising your account.
Six questions this report settles with a number
Each answer is quoted from the study and names the ad set it was observed in.
How much do beauty creators actually charge?
Question 01 of sixThe one dataset built on confirmed deals rather than asking prices puts the micro median at $1,000 per post, with a 25th percentile of $480 and a mean of $2,706 skewed by outliers. Published ranges are accurate at their top and miss where deals close. From the QuickAds beauty and supplement creator rates report.
Why do published influencer rate cards disagree so much?
Question 02 of sixBecause none of them measure the same thing. A nano creator on Instagram is quoted at $25 to $150 by one publisher, $50 to $200 by another, $100 to $500 by a third and $200 to $2,000 by a fourth, and the third and fourth are the same company on two pages. From the QuickAds beauty and supplement creator rates report.
What does affordable actually mean for creator content?
Question 03 of sixA unit price, not a follower tier. A 112,000-follower account averaging 9,600 views at $980 costs $102 per thousand views; a 46,800-follower account averaging 15,100 views at $740 costs $49. Ask for average views on the last ten posts before discussing price. From the QuickAds beauty and supplement creator rates report.
Are there enough small creators to run an affordable programme?
Question 04 of sixYes. Of nearly 78,000 tracked TikTok creators, 37.9% are nano and 37% micro. Supply was never the constraint. Finding and vetting them takes longer than the budget saved, which is why brands default to the expensive tier they can find quickly. From the QuickAds beauty and supplement creator rates report.
Why do supplement creators cost more than beauty creators?
Question 05 of sixNano supplement rates run $100 to $700 against beauty's $50 to $200, and the premium is regulatory rather than about audience value. Meta moved to claims-based enforcement in July 2026 and the FTC holds the advertiser liable for what an endorser says. From the QuickAds beauty and supplement creator rates report.
Where should you open a creator negotiation?
Question 06 of sixAt the 25th percentile, not the midpoint of a published range. Brands anchor on a ceiling and negotiate down from it, when a meaningful share of deals close near $480 at micro. From the QuickAds beauty and supplement creator rates report.
One exhibit, partly open
Six of the confirmed figures. The full report carries the rate cards, the supply map and the claims premium.
What the tiers actually cost
Live rows| Measure | Figure |
|---|---|
| Confirmed micro median, per post | $1,000 |
| Confirmed micro 25th percentile | $480 |
| Beauty nano, per Instagram Reel | $50-200 |
| Supplements nano, per Instagram Reel | $100-700 |
Cheap and underpriced are different things, and only one of them works twice.
Five moves, in order
Drawn from the report. The reasoning behind each one sits in the full study.
- Stop using published ranges as a budget input. Use them only to check your order of magnitude.
- Open at the 25th percentile rather than the midpoint.
- Ask for average views on the last ten posts, then divide the quote by that number.
- Count sourcing time as part of the rate. A $200 creator who takes three hours is not $200.
- Put the banned-phrase list in the brief, not the contract.
Built for the people briefing the work
- Beauty or supplement brands briefing creators on a volume budget
- Growth leads who got ten different quotes from one tier
- Anyone told micro is $500 to $3,500 who paid near the top
- Supplement brands where one wrong sentence costs more than the creator
Read ad by ad, not modelled
- Confirmed-deal data from 294 closed deals, not asking prices or rate cards.
- Published ranges reproduced as published, including where publishers contradict themselves.
- Supply figures from a tracked pool of nearly 78,000 TikTok creators.
- Not a directory. The report is about how to price and evaluate, not who to hire.
Open the full study
Submit the form to download the printable PDF text and data edition, then open the complete online report.
Report unlocked
Your request is saved. The PDF download will start, then the online report will open. If your browser pauses the download, use Download PDF again.
Read it now