Intro
Many creators considering a switch or expansion ask this question: 👉 Is Kick more profitable than YouTube Gaming?
The short answer is: Kick can be more profitable than YouTube Gaming — but it depends on how you define “profitability” and how you engage your audience.
This article breaks down the key differences, revenue streams, typical earnings, and where each platform shines — so you can see when and why Kick may pay more (or less) than YouTube Gaming.
💸 Core Monetization Models: Kick vs YouTube Gaming
| Monetization Feature | Kick | YouTube Gaming |
| Subscription Share | 95 % to creator | ~70 % to creator (after platform cut) |
| Tips & Donations | Native tipping (creator keeps almost 100 %) | “Super Chat / Super Thanks” (platform takes a cut) |
| Ad Revenue | Limited & variable | Major revenue driver (AdSense) |
| Partner Bonuses | Occasional incentive programs | Bonus programs (“YouTube Gaming Fund,” Shorts bonuses) |
| Algorithmic Discovery | Limited | Strong (YouTube search + recommendation) |
At a glance:
- Kick prioritizes direct audience support (subscriptions + tips)
- YouTube pays more from ads but takes a larger platform cut and relies heavily on view-based monetization
📊 1. Subscription Revenue: Kick Has a Big Advantage
Kick’s subscription split — 95 / 5 — is one of the most generous in streaming. For a $5 subscription:
- Creator keeps ≈ $4.75
- Kick keeps ≈ $0.25
On YouTube Gaming:
- YouTube typically takes ~30 % of channel memberships
- Creator keeps ~70 %
- Actual net after taxes/fees can be lower
Example (100 subscribers):
- Kick: ~$475/month
- YouTube Gaming: ~$350/month
🔥 Kick’s higher take-home makes subscriptions more immediately profitable.
💬 2. Tips & Donations: Simpler, More Direct on Kick
Kick
- Native tipping during streams
- Creators keep nearly 100 % (minus payment processing)
- Designed for live interaction
YouTube Gaming
- “Super Chat” / “Super Thanks”
- Platform takes a significant cut (often 30 %)
- More common in traditional livestreams than in gaming live
Kick’s tipping feels more creator-friendly and rewarding, especially for live communities.
📺 3. Ad Revenue: YouTube Typically Pays More
This is where YouTube Gaming often beats Kick:
- YouTube’s AdSense ads are a core monetization engine
- YouTube serves pre-rolls, mid-rolls, display ads, and mobile ads
- CPMs are typically higher and more consistent
Kick’s ad system is:
- Less developed
- Variable
- Not core to most creators’ income
So if you rely heavily on ads, YouTube generally pays better — especially for channels with large view counts.
📈 4. Algorithm and Discovery: YouTube’s Strength
YouTube doesn’t just pay via ads — it also recommends your content to viewers automatically. Its discovery engine:
- Surfaces clips and live content to new audiences
- Drives long-tail traffic via search and watch suggestions
- Sends traffic even when you’re not live
Kick currently lacks a strong discovery system, meaning creators often need external traffic (SEO, social media, community promotion) to drive growth.
For passive traffic and evergreen video revenue, YouTube tends to outperform Kick.
🧠 5. When Kick Is More Profitable
Kick often outperforms YouTube Gaming when:
✅ You have a highly engaged community
Engaged chat + loyal viewers = more subscriptions & tips.
✅ You stream live consistently
Live interaction drives more tips and subscriptions on Kick than passive watching does on YouTube.
✅ You convert viewers into subscribers early
Because of the better revenue split, even a modest number of subs earns more on Kick.
✅ You don’t rely on ads
If your audience doesn’t click ads or skip them, YouTube ad revenue might be limited — but Kick’s model doesn’t depend on ads.
📈 6. When YouTube Gaming May Be More Profitable
YouTube can be more profitable when you rely on:
📌 Passive ad income
If your videos and streams get loads of views without live engagement, YouTube’s CPM + algorithmic reach can generate significant revenue.
📌 Evergreen content
YouTube content continues earning long after it’s posted, while Kick typically focuses on live engagement.
📌 Massive global reach
YouTube’s audience is far larger and discovery is built into the platform.
For channels that do well with long-form, search-driven traffic, YouTube’s ecosystem is a major advantage.
🔄 Hybrid Strategy Works Well
Many creators choose both platforms:
- Use Kick for monetization with a live, paying community
- Use YouTube for discoverability and ad revenue
- Repurpose Kick clips for YouTube to drive additional traffic
This approach combines Kick’s high take-home with YouTube’s reach.
🔍 Estimated Revenue Comparison (Illustrative Only)
| Revenue Type | Kick (est) | YouTube Gaming (est) |
| 100 subscribers | $475/mo | $350/mo |
| 1,000 subscribers | $4,750/mo | $3,500/mo |
| Ad revenue from 100K views | Variable | ~$200-$600* |
| Tips per stream | High potential | Lower via Super Chat |
*YouTube ad revenue fluctuates widely by niche, region, and watch time.
🧩 Key Takeaways
✅ Kick pays more per subscriber due to its 95 / 5 split ✅ Kick’s tipping is more lucrative for live engagement ✅ YouTube pays more from ads and discoverability ✅ Hybrid streaming strategies often earn the most ✅ Engagement > views on Kick; views still matter on YouTube
Final Verdict
Is Kick more profitable than YouTube Gaming? 👉 Yes — if your strength is live engagement, subscriptions, and tips.
But YouTube can be more profitable overall if you:
- Want passive earnings through evergreen videos
- Rely on ad revenue and search visibility
In many cases, the best outcome is a cross-platform strategy that leverages Kick’s monetization for live communities and YouTube’s reach for passive discovery and ad income.
