Do nano-creators perform better on TikTok than on Instagram?

By Tom Bogaert · Reviewed on
Part of: Micro-influencer marketing
10.3% average engagement rate of nano-creators on TikTok archive.com, sectoranalyse nano-influencer performance, 2025

On paper yes, and by a wide margin: 10.3% average engagement for nano-creators on TikTok against 2.71% on Instagram, according to a 2025 sector analysis by archive.com. YouTube sits in between at 5.43%.

That gap says more about the platform than about the creator. TikTok pushes content to people who don't follow the account, so reach comes largely from outside the follower list — while the engagement rate is still measured against that small follower count. Instagram mostly shows a post to people who already follow. The same athlete can be equally good on both and still show a fourfold difference.

For a brand that means one thing: never compare a TikTok percentage with an Instagram percentage. Judging a squad against a TikTok benchmark while the content lives on Instagram is an arithmetic error that can get a working campaign cancelled. Measure each platform against its own average, within the same tier.

Our collabs are centred on Instagram. That's where the running, cycling and triathlon communities are, along with the evidence that comes with them: race reports, training weeks, shoes after 400 kilometres. We use TikTok selectively, mostly where fitness and Hyrox are strong, and with different expectations about what a view is worth.

Sources

  1. archive.com, sectoranalyse nano-influencer performance

Also searched for

  • engagement rate tiktok vs instagram
  • tiktok or instagram influencer
  • nano influencer tiktok engagement
  • which platform for influencer campaign

Related questions

What is the difference between a micro-influencer and a macro-influencer?

Micro-influencers (1,000–100,000 followers) have a smaller but sharper audience than macro-influencers. The difference isn’t in the number but in the relationship: micro-influencers build an audience around a specific niche, leading to higher engagement and more precise relevance per recommendation.Read why the number says less than the relationship behind it →

Does micro-influencer marketing actually work?

Micro-influencer marketing works — but fails systematically with wrong creator selection or when content is stripped from the context that made it credible. The right benchmark isn’t reach but delivery rate: were the posts actually made, by the right people, in the right context?Read when micro-influencer marketing fails — and why →

What is a good engagement rate for a nano-influencer on Instagram?

The average for nano-influencers on Instagram is 2.71% (archive.com sector analysis, 2025) — the highest of any tier. Use it as a benchmark, not a cut-off: where the engagement comes from says more than the percentage itself.Read the full answer →

What if a sportfluencer doesn't post (on time)?

We carry that risk. Curation up front, agreements in the briefing, follow-up during the posting window and back-ups from the same pool — plus an honest completion rate afterwards: how many of the 25 actually delivered.Read how the three layers of risk management work in practice →

How long does it take from briefing to a live collab?

Count on four to six weeks from signed briefing to first posts: application window (1-3 weeks) → curation + squad review (5-7 working days) → shipping (a few days to a week) → posting window (2-3 weeks). Working toward a fixed date, we count back.See the full timeline in weeks, from briefing to first posts →
← Back to FAQ