Royalty-Free Music Platforms That Pay Artists: My Earnings on 5 Different Sites

As a composer who’s been creating music professionally for over a decade, I’ve witnessed the dramatic transformation of the royalty-free music landscape. What was once a niche market has exploded into a thriving ecosystem that supports thousands of musicians worldwide.

For the past two years, I’ve been systematically uploading my compositions to various royalty-free music platforms to determine which ones actually provide meaningful income for artists. Today, I’m sharing my real earnings data from five major platforms, along with insights into what types of music perform best on each.

If you’re a musician considering entering the royalty-free market—or a content creator curious about where your licensing fees actually go—this transparent look at the industry might surprise you.

My Methodology: Ensuring a Fair Comparison

To make this comparison as fair as possible, I followed a consistent approach:

1. Identical Portfolio: I uploaded the same 50 tracks to each platform (with minor variations when required by platform guidelines).
2. Diverse Genres: My portfolio included corporate/business tracks, emotional piano pieces, cinematic orchestral compositions, upbeat electronic music, and ambient soundscapes.
3. Consistent Quality: All tracks were professionally mixed and mastered to industry standards.
4. Equal Promotion: I gave each platform equal promotion through my social media channels.
5. 12-Month Tracking: I tracked earnings from July 2024 to July 2025 to account for seasonal variations.

Let’s dive into the results.

1. Epidemic Sound: The Volume Leader

• Total 12-Month Earnings: $8,743.26
• Number of Downloads/Uses: 2,187
• Average Per Download: $4.00
• Payment Model: Upfront payment + streaming royalties

How Epidemic Sound Works for Artists:

Epidemic Sound operates on a unique model where they purchase music outright from composers. They offer an upfront payment for each accepted track, plus additional royalties based on streaming performance.

According to their current terms, they typically pay between $100-$500 per track upfront, depending on quality and their current catalog needs. Artists then receive a share of subscription revenue based on how often their tracks are used in projects and streamed on platforms like YouTube and Twitch.

My Experience:

Epidemic Sound accepted 42 of my 50 submitted tracks over the 12-month period. The initial payments ranged from $120 to $380 per track, with an average of $207. These upfront payments accounted for $8,694 of my total earnings.

The remaining $49.26 came from streaming royalties, which were disappointingly low despite my tracks being used in numerous YouTube videos with millions of combined views.

Best-Performing Genres:

Corporate/business tracks and emotional piano pieces performed exceptionally well on Epidemic Sound, with almost all submissions in these categories being accepted. My electronic and ambient tracks had lower acceptance rates.

Pros:

• Guaranteed upfront payment for accepted tracks
• High-quality platform with major clients
• Professional team that provides feedback
• No exclusivity requirement (as of 2025)

Cons:

• Highly selective acceptance process (16% rejection rate in my case)
• Minimal ongoing royalties despite widespread usage
• Limited transparency about how tracks are promoted within the platform

2. Artlist: The Balanced Performer

• Total 12-Month Earnings: $6,219.84
• Number of Downloads/Uses: 734
• Average Per Download: $8.47
• Payment Model: Revenue share based on downloads

How Artlist Works for Artists:

Artlist uses a revenue-sharing model where artists receive a portion of subscription fees based on how often their tracks are downloaded. Unlike Epidemic Sound, there’s no upfront payment—earnings are entirely based on performance.

According to LinkedIn, “Payment structures on these platforms vary; some offer one-time purchases, while others provide revenue-sharing models where artists earn a percentage of each sale.”

Artlist falls into the latter category, with artists typically receiving between $7-$12 per download depending on various factors including exclusivity arrangements.

My Experience:

All 50 of my submitted tracks were accepted by Artlist, which already gave it an advantage over Epidemic Sound in terms of catalog representation. While the total earnings were lower than Epidemic Sound, the per-download rate was significantly higher at $8.47.

What impressed me most was the consistency of earnings—every month saw at least 40 downloads, with peaks during the holiday season (November-December) and pre-summer (April-May).

Best-Performing Genres:

Cinematic orchestral compositions and emotional piano pieces performed best on Artlist, accounting for nearly 70% of my downloads. Corporate tracks, which were my strongest category on Epidemic Sound, performed relatively poorly here.

Pros:

• Higher per-download earnings
• More transparent reporting dashboard
• Less selective acceptance process
• Growing user base of professional filmmakers and content creators

Cons:

• No guaranteed upfront payments
• Requires more tracks to generate significant income
• Longer payment processing time (45-60 days after the end of each quarter)

3. AudioJungle (Envato): The Legacy Platform

• Total 12-Month Earnings: $3,842.15
• Number of Downloads/Uses: 427
• Average Per Download: $9.00
• Payment Model: Per-sale with variable pricing

How AudioJungle Works for Artists:

AudioJungle operates on a traditional marketplace model where artists set their own prices (within platform guidelines) and earn a percentage of each sale. Non-exclusive content earns 33% royalties, while exclusive content earns between 40-60% depending on your overall sales volume.

According to Lucid Samples, “AudioJungle is one of the oldest music licensing platforms and is part of the Envato family, offering a combination of royalty-free music and other resources.”

My Experience:

AudioJungle accepted all 50 of my tracks, which I priced between $19 and $49 depending on complexity and length. With my non-exclusive arrangement, I earned approximately33% of each sale.

The platform showed the most dramatic variation in monthly earnings, with some months generating over $500 and others barely breaking $200. This unpredictability makes it difficult to rely on AudioJungle as a consistent income source.

Best-Performing Genres:

Corporate/business tracks dominated my AudioJungle sales, accounting for nearly 60% of downloads. Upbeat electronic music performed reasonably well, while my cinematic and ambient tracks—which did well on other platforms—struggled here.

Pros:

• Higher per-download earnings potential
• Control over pricing
• Established marketplace with long history
• Detailed analytics on customer demographics and search terms

Cons:

• Highly saturated marketplace with over 1.9 million tracks
• Significant competition drives prices down
• Lower overall sales volume
• Aging interface and search algorithm

4. Pond5: The Specialized Marketplace

• Total 12-Month Earnings: $2,156.80
• Number of Downloads/Uses: 48
• Average Per Download: $44.93
• Payment Model: Per-sale with variable pricing

How Pond5 Works for Artists:

Similar to AudioJungle, Pond5 allows artists to set their own prices and earn a percentage of each sale. The standard royalty rate is 40% for non-exclusive content and 60% for exclusive content.

What sets Pond5 apart is its focus on higher-end productions—their customer base includes major film studios, advertising agencies, and broadcast networks willing to pay premium prices for quality music.

My Experience:

Pond5 accepted 47 of my 50 submitted tracks. I priced my tracks significantly higher than on other platforms, ranging from $49 to $299 depending on complexity, length, and licensing options.

While Pond5 generated the lowest number of sales by far, the average earning per download was astronomical compared to other platforms at $44.93. Most of these came from extended licenses for commercial projects.

Best-Performing Genres:

Cinematic orchestral compositions were the clear winner on Pond5, accounting for over 70% of my sales. These tracks were typically purchased for higher-end video productions, documentaries, and advertising.

Pros:

• Highest per-download earnings
• Premium customer base willing to pay for quality
• Multiple license tiers allow for higher-priced options
• Good search visibility for niche categories

Cons:

• Lowest overall sales volume
• Long review times for new submissions (sometimes 2-3 weeks)
• Inconsistent monthly earnings
• Higher quality threshold for acceptance

5. Uppbeat: The Newcomer

• Total 12-Month Earnings: $1,574.35
• Number of Downloads/Uses: 3,142
• Average Per Download: $0.50
• Payment Model: Combination of free/premium downloads

How Uppbeat Works for Artists:

Uppbeat is a relatively new platform with an innovative approach. They offer both free and premium subscription options for users. Artists earn a small amount even when their tracks are downloaded by free users, and significantly more when downloaded by premium subscribers.

According to Uppbeat’s blog, “Uppbeat pays artists for every download, whether it is a free download or through a premium subscription.”

My Experience:

Uppbeat accepted all 50 of my submitted tracks. The platform generated by far the highest number of downloads at 3,142, but with the lowest average earning per download at just $0.50.

What’s interesting about Uppbeat is the promotional value—several of my tracks that performed well there gained traction on streaming platforms like Spotify afterward, suggesting that Uppbeat serves as a discovery platform for many listeners.

Best-Performing Genres:

Electronic music and ambient soundscapes dominated my Uppbeat downloads, accounting for over 80% of total activity. This stands in stark contrast to platforms like Pond5 and Artlist, where my orchestral and piano compositions performed best.

Pros:

• Highest number of downloads/uses
• Growing platform with an innovative model
• Excellent for building audience and exposure
• Simple submission process with quick reviews

Cons:

• Lowest per-download earnings by far
• Younger user base with fewer commercial projects
• Limited reporting and analytics
• Uncertain long-term sustainability of their business model

Comparing Total Earnings Across Platforms

Here’s a summary of my earnings across all five platforms over the 12-month period:

Key Insights from My 12-Month Experiment

After analyzing a full year of data across five platforms, several important patterns emerged:

1. The Quality-Quantity Spectrum

Platforms clearly position themselves along a spectrum from high-volume, low-pay (Uppbeat) to low-volume, high-pay (Pond5). Epidemic Sound and Artlist occupy the middle ground, offering reasonable per-download rates with decent volume.

2. Genre Specialization by Platform

Each platform seemed to favor specific types of music:

• Epidemic Sound: Corporate/business and emotional piano
• Artlist: Cinematic orchestral and emotional piano
• AudioJungle: Corporate/business and electronic
• Pond5: Cinematic orchestral and documentary-style
• Uppbeat: Electronic and ambient

Understanding these preferences allowed me to optimize my production strategy over time.

3. Seasonal Variations

Royalty-free music earnings showed clear seasonal patterns:

• Q4 (Oct-Dec): Highest earnings across all platforms (holiday-related content)
• Q2 (Apr-Jun): Second highest (pre-summer content production)
• Q3 (Jul-Sep): Third highest (back-to-school and fall campaigns)
• Q1 (Jan-Mar): Lowest earnings (post-holiday slump)

This pattern was consistent across all platforms and aligns with typical content production cycles.

4. The Value of Diversification

No single platform dominated across all metrics. While Epidemic Sound provided the highest total earnings, Artlist offered better per-download rates, Pond5 had the highest-value individual sales, and Uppbeat generated the most exposure.

This reinforces the importance of diversifying across multiple platforms rather than focusing exclusively on one.

Platform-Specific Strategies That Worked

Through experimentation, I discovered several platform-specific strategies that significantly improved earnings:

Epidemic Sound

• Focus on Catalog Gaps: Researching their existing library to identify underrepresented styles or instruments dramatically improved acceptance rates.
• Metadata Optimization: Detailed, accurate metadata with specific moods and energy levels improved internal discoverability.
• Consistent Submissions: Submitting 3-5 tracks monthly kept me on their radar and improved acceptance rates over time.

Artlist

• Theme-Based Collections: Creating cohesive collections of 5-7 tracks around specific themes or moods improved download rates.
• Alternative Versions: Providing multiple versions (full, 60-second, 30-second, loops) of the same track increased overall downloads.
• Seasonal Planning: Creating holiday and event-specific music 3-4 months in advance led to higher seasonal download spikes.

AudioJungle

• Competitive Pricing: Pricing slightly below market average for similar tracks improved sales volume.
• Keyword Research: Using their search analytics to identify high-demand, low-competition keywords improved visibility.
• Regular Updates: Refreshing track descriptions and tags every 2-3 months maintained search visibility.

Pond5

• Premium Positioning: Higher pricing actually increased sales by positioning tracks in the premium category.
• Niche Specialization: Focusing on underserved niches (like specific emotional orchestral styles) reduced competition.
• Extended Licensing: Creating tracks specifically designed for commercial use with extended licensing options increased high-value sales.

Uppbeat

• Trend Alignment: Following current music trends in YouTube and TikTok content improved download rates.
• Consistency: Regular weekly submissions kept my profile visible in the “new releases” section.
• Cross-Promotion: Linking to my streaming profiles in track descriptions drove additional traffic to my Spotify and Apple Music.

The Reality of Royalty-Free Music Income in 2025

My total earnings of $22,536.40 across all platforms might sound impressive, but it’s important to put this in context:

1. Time Investment: These earnings came from 50 tracks, representing hundreds of hours of composition, recording, mixing, and mastering.
2. Experience Factor: As a professional composer with over a decade of experience, my technical quality and commercial awareness gave me advantages over beginners.
3. Equipment Costs: Professional-quality music production requires significant investment in instruments, recording equipment, software, and studio space.
4. Market Saturation: Competition has intensified dramatically. According to Cable Free Guitar, “In 2025, a million streams on Spotify will net artists approximately enough for a burrito and a side of guacamole.” While royalty-free platforms generally pay better than streaming, the market is becoming increasingly crowded.

Is Royalty-Free Music Still Worth It for Artists in 2025?

Based on my experience and data, here’s my assessment of whether creating royalty-free music is still viable:

For Professional Composers: Qualified Yes

If you’re already producing high-quality music and understand commercial requirements, royalty-free platforms can provide a valuable additional revenue stream. Using the “compose once, sell many times” approach, you can monetize work efficiently.

For Semi-Professional Musicians: Maybe

If you have solid production skills and understand what types of music perform well commercially, royalty-free music can generate supplemental income. However, it should be viewed as one of several revenue streams rather than a primary income source.

For Hobbyists: Probably Not

The technical quality, commercial awareness, and volume required to generate meaningful income make it difficult for hobbyists to compete effectively. The days of casual producers making significant money from stock music are largely over.

My Current Strategy: The Hybrid Approach

Based on 12 months of data, I’ve adjusted my royalty-free music strategy to maximize returns:

1. Platform Prioritization: I now focus 80% of my efforts on the top three performing platforms (Epidemic Sound, Artlist, and AudioJungle) while maintaining but not actively growing my presence on the others.
2. Platform-Specific Production: I create music with specific platforms in mind, tailoring style, length, and format to each platform’s preferences.
3. Genre Specialization: I’ve narrowed my focus to the three genres that performed best across all platforms: corporate/business, emotional piano, and cinematic orchestral.
4. Batch Production: I now create music in batches of similar style/genre, which improves efficiency and maintains consistent quality.
5. Metadata Optimization: I invest significant time in platform-specific metadata, using each platform’s unique categorization system and search algorithms.

This approach has already increased my monthly earnings by approximately 30% compared to the testing period.

Conclusion: The Platforms Worth Your Time

If you’re considering creating royalty-free music in 2025, here’s my recommendation based on 12 months of comparative data:

Tier 1 (Essential Platforms):

• Epidemic Sound (if you can get accepted)
• Artlist
• AudioJungle

Tier 2 (Worthwhile Additions):

• Pond5 (especially for cinematic/orchestral composers)
• Uppbeat (for electronic/ambient producers seeking exposure)

Tier 3 (Consider With Caution):

• Smaller platforms with unproven track records
• Platforms requiring full exclusivity
• Sites offering only exposure without meaningful compensation

By focusing your efforts on the platforms that deliver the best returns for your specific style and genre, you can maximize earnings while minimizing the administrative overhead of managing multiple platforms.

The royalty-free music market continues to evolve rapidly, with new platforms emerging and existing ones adjusting their models. While competition has increased significantly, quality music that meets commercial needs still has the potential to generate meaningful income for composers willing to adapt to the market’s demands.

Have you had experience selling music on royalty-free platforms? Which ones have performed best for your work? Share your experiences in the comments below!