Live-stream ad CTR: benchmark across 9 APIQ campaigns

Across seven APIQ campaigns in Turkey (Twitch, plus one on Twitch and Kick, 2023–2025), 2,270,947 verified views produced 31,242 clicks. The weighted CTR is 1.38%, and individual campaigns ranged from 0.61% to 2.01%. Two large Twitch campaigns, with 9.86M and 1.86M+ verified views, delivered CTRs of 0.84% and 0.78%.

Brands and agencies often ask what CTR is normal for ads inside live streams. There is no industry-wide answer yet: sellers calculate CTR in different ways and rarely publish the underlying numbers. This page collects every APIQ campaign published with clicks and views, using the CTRs stated in the reports. It is data from one network, not the market. What each metric means is covered in Twitch campaign metrics; here you get only the numbers and what follows from them.

Every campaign in one table

CTR is as stated in APIQ client reports. It usually equals clicks ÷ verified views; the three cases where the report value differs from that division are marked with footnotes. All campaigns ran on Twitch except Mion (Twitch and Kick).

¹ CTR from the client report. Dividing the published clicks by views gives 0.65%. ² Mion: the campaign ran on Twitch and Kick. CTR as shown on the APIQ formats page. Dividing the published 779 clicks by 182,927 views gives 0.43%. ³ Clicks and views are published as lower bounds (1.86M+ and 14k+); CTR is from the report. Dividing the lower bounds gives 0.75%.

The first seven campaigns ran in Turkey. The country of the two large campaigns is not disclosed. Details of each campaign are on the case studies page.

Totals for the seven Turkish campaigns

What the numbers show

Below is only what follows directly from the table. These are observations about these campaigns, not rules for any campaign.

Views per streamer is our calculation: verified views divided by the number of streamers.

The spread is wide. Among the Turkish campaigns, the highest CTR (Migros Hemen, 2.01%) is about 3.3 times the lowest (Mion, 0.61%). Taking only the six Twitch campaigns, the gap is about 2.9 times (2.01% against 0.69% for Hepsiburada). One network, one method and one market produce very different CTRs.

The weighted CTR sits below the median. The weighted CTR is 1.38%, the median 1.47%. L'Oréal Paris accounts for 35% of all views across the seven campaigns, and its CTR (1.47%) matches the median. The two campaigns with the lowest CTR, Hepsiburada and Mion, together delivered 19% of views and pull the total down.

Format alone doesn't determine CTR. The three video campaigns combined reached a weighted CTR of 1.43%, the four banner campaigns 1.35% (1.47% excluding Mion). The gap between formats is smaller than the gap within each format: video ranged from 0.69% to 2.01%, banners from 0.61% to 1.89%. Two side banners of the same size delivered 1.89% (adidas) and 1.04% (Monster Notebook).

Views per streamer show no direct relationship. In the Turkish campaigns, each streamer delivered between 742 and 2,287 views. Both extremes belong to low-CTR campaigns: Hepsiburada (742 views, 0.69%) and Mion (2,287 views, 0.61%). Three campaigns with 1,300–1,600 views per streamer reached 2.01%, 1.89% and 1.04%. This data doesn't show that more impressions per channel raise or lower CTR.

Duration doesn't line CTR up either. The shortest campaign (Monster Notebook, 6 days) delivered 1.04%, Mavi's week 1.61%, Migros Hemen's 14 days 2.01%, Hepsiburada's 21 days 0.69%, L'Oréal Paris's 32 days 1.47%. Neither short nor long campaigns in this sample show a consistently higher CTR.

The two largest campaigns had lower CTRs than most of the Turkish ones. Fintech (9.86M views) reached 0.84%, retail and electronics (1.86M+) 0.78%. Five of the seven Turkish campaigns were above 0.84%. These two campaigns account for more than 83% of all views in the sample. This is an observation about two campaigns. They differ from the Turkish ones in more than size: a different category, a different number of streamers on air at the same time, and an undisclosed country. So the data doesn't show that CTR falls because of size.

The two CTR leaders both have a chat link in their case descriptions. Migros Hemen (2.01%) posted a chat link every 15 minutes; adidas (1.89%) ran three impressions per channel plus a chat link. That fits where clicks come from (see the next section), but doesn't prove cause: product, audience, season and creative differed too.

Where the clicks come from

The CTR in the table counts all three clickable slots of an APIQ placement. The click split is covered in detail in Where clicks come from in live-stream ads. On average across campaigns, about 80% of clicks come from the chat link, about 10% from the QR code and about 10% from clicks on the screen. That is an average, not a rule: in a 30-day fintech campaign on Twitch, 96.5% of clicks came from native links in the chat.

The practical takeaway for comparing benchmarks: a CTR counted on screen clicks alone can't be compared with the figures in this table.

Two APIQ estimates across many campaigns, not tied to any specific campaign in the table:

• A QR landing page for mobile apps lifts installs by at least 20%.
• A streamer lead-in (the streamer briefly introduces the ad in their own words) lifts the CTR of the clickable elements by more than 50%. A lead-in is up to the streamer; it is not a campaign requirement.

How we calculate

• CTR = clicks ÷ verified views × 100%. Clicks include the chat link, the QR code and on-screen clicks.
• Verified view: an impression in which the creative was displayed correctly, was fully visible and met the campaign requirements. Every view is confirmed by a screenshot and computer vision, and the audience is checked against 14 anti-fraud parameters. Suspicious traffic goes into neither the report nor the invoice.
• Weighted CTR = total clicks ÷ total views for a group of campaigns. Large campaigns move it more than small ones.
• Median: the middle value of the CTRs sorted in ascending order. It doesn't depend on campaign size.
• Source: APIQ client reports published on the case studies page. The Turkish campaigns ran from 20.03.2023 to 29.09.2025; the two large campaigns lasted 30 and 11 days, and their dates are not disclosed. Figures checked on 31.10.2026.
• Cross-check. We divided clicks by views for each campaign and compared the result with the report CTR. For Hepsiburada, Mion and retail the values differ: the table shows the report CTR, and the differences are given in the footnotes. The weighted CTR is calculated from clicks and views; the medians and ranges from the CTRs in the table.
• Reporting match: how closely campaign statistics in the APIQ report match the client's own. In the fintech campaign it was 99.94%. That is one campaign's figure, not a guarantee for others.

Ad networks usually divide clicks by impressions, not by verified views. CTRs with different denominators can't be compared.

These nine campaigns are part of the APIQ network's work: 2,300+ streamers, 120+ brands and agencies, 410+ campaigns since 2023. How the buy works (one CPV rate for every streamer, guaranteed views, payment only for verified views) is described on the for brands page.

Caveats

• The sample is small. Nine campaigns out of 410+: seven Turkish and two large ones. This is not the live-stream ad market as a whole, nor the average result of all APIQ campaigns.
• These are published case studies. The campaigns were not chosen for publication at random, so they may differ from the rest.
• Different formats and categories. Cosmetics, grocery delivery, sportswear, laptops, electronics, apparel, fintech, retail. Differences in CTR may come from the product, audience, season and creative rather than the format.
• Different years. The Turkish campaigns ran in 2023 and 2025; audiences and platforms changed over that time.
• Mion ran on two platforms. The campaign ran on Twitch and Kick at once. Kick brought more views, Twitch a higher CTR. The 0.61% CTR is as shown on the APIQ formats page; dividing total clicks by total views gives 0.43%.
• Hepsiburada has a discrepancy. The CTR in the client report is 0.69%, while 1,656 clicks ÷ 253,749 views = 0.65%. The table and the median use 0.69%.
• Retail and electronics are lower bounds. The published figures are 1.86M+ views and 14k+ clicks, so the division gives 0.75%, while the report CTR is 0.78%.
• Streamers in the large campaigns are counted as those on air at the same time, so their views per streamer can't be compared with the Turkish campaigns.
• This is not a forecast. A pilot gives you your own CTR baseline: the media plan arrives within 24 hours, and launch follows 1–2 days after the streamer and creative list is approved.