OnlyFans vs. Fansly, Fanvue & LoyalFans: What Creators Really Charge in 2026

FanBrowse Creator Price Index · H1 2026 Edition

≈ 9 min read  ·  Data snapshot: July 3, 2026  ·  Next edition: January 2027

Plenty of studies estimate what fans spend on OnlyFans. Almost nobody measures the other side of the market: what creators actually charge. For the first edition of the FanBrowse Creator Price Index, we counted — real, hand-verified subscription prices from 1,244 creator profiles across OnlyFans, Fansly, Fanvue and LoyalFans. The result is a price picture that modelled estimates can’t produce, and it holds a few surprises.

The Platform Price Index: OnlyFans is the discount platform of its own market

Across every verified profile with a paid subscription in our directory, this is what a month actually costs in mid-2026:

The market leader is the cheapest place to subscribe. The niche platforms charge the premium: a paid month on LoyalFans costs twice the OnlyFans median, and its average of $17.72 is pulled up by a visible high-price segment that has almost disappeared from OnlyFans.

The cleanest comparison: the same creator, two platforms

Platform averages can be skewed by who is on each platform. So we isolated the 86 creators in our directory who run paid pages on both OnlyFans and Fansly — the same person, the same content, two price tags. The result: a typical $6.00 on OnlyFans against $9.99 on Fansly. The identical creator charges 66% more on Fansly. 52 of the 86 price Fansly higher, only 19 price it lower, and the average surcharge is $2.61 per month.

The most plausible reading: OnlyFans is where creators compete for volume and reach, while Fansly works as the higher-priced second storefront for fans who follow them there — often for content that OnlyFans’ stricter rules don’t allow (more on that below).

The sub-$10 economy: the subscription is the ticket, not the product

68% of all paid OnlyFans pages cost less than $10 a month, and the single most common bracket is $3–5. The famous $9.99 price point — for years the industry default — is now used by just 13% of paid pages. Only 4% charge more than $25.

This makes sense once you look at where the money actually arrives. A transaction study published in May 2026 by the analytics team of agency platform OnlyTraffic — built on more than two million transactions from free pages — found that only about a fifth of a fan’s eventual spending happens on day one, roughly half within the first month, and the rest over as much as two years, mostly through paid messages and pay-per-view rather than the subscription itself. In that economy the subscription price is the entry ticket: keep the door cheap, monetise the relationship behind it. Our supply-side numbers show creators have priced accordingly.

Experience beats youth — by more than double

If you assume youth carries the premium in this industry, the data says the opposite. Creators aged 28–34 typically charge $9.34 — 135% above the 18–22 bracket, and prices stay high past 35. The niche numbers confirm it: the teen (18+) and cosplay categories sit at the low end of the price range with typical subscriptions of $5.00, while MILF, couple and celebrity pages occupy the premium end. Pricing power in this market comes from an established audience, not from a birth date.

The free half: 49.9% of verified creators cost nothing to follow

The single biggest structural shift our index captures: half of all verified creators (49.9%) can be followed for free — through a free page, a free trial, or a $0 subscription. The market splits into three groups:

• 37% run a pure free page — no paid subscription at all; the money is made behind the free door through messages and pay-per-view.
• 50% are paid-only.
• 13% run both — a paid VIP page plus a free page as a funnel. Put differently: one in five paid creators operates an additional free entry point.

The free strategy also has a geography. In our sample, creators from Ukraine (73% free) and the USA (56%) rely heavily on free pages, while the UK is the paywall stronghold of the market: only 22% of British creators offer free access. Germany sits in between at 40%.

For readers who want to see this segment rather than read about it: our hand-checked list of the best free OnlyFans pages is built from exactly this data, and every verified profile in the directory can be filtered by price — including $0.

Platform profiles: what the numbers say about Fansly, LoyalFans and Fanvue

Fansly confirms its reputation with data for the first time in this index: explicit niches are strongly overrepresented among Fansly creators compared to the directory as a whole — creampie 3.2×, squirt and BDSM 2.1×, anal 1.8×. Combined with the 66% same-creator price premium, the pattern is consistent: Fansly is the higher-priced, lower-restriction second storefront. LoyalFans is the smallest platform in our sample but shows the clearest premium positioning, with a $13 typical price and a real segment above $25. Fanvue remains too small in our directory for firm price conclusions — its specialty is AI-generated creators, and we expect this segment to be the most interesting change to track in the H2 edition.

Multi-platform publishing, by the way, is far rarer than industry talk suggests: 90.6% of verified creators run exactly one platform. Of those who do diversify, nine in ten choose the OnlyFans + Fansly combination.

The social stack: three channels are standard, and one in six creators has none

Where do creators actually maintain a verified presence? X (72.7%) and Instagram (72.3%) are effectively level at the top — a statistical tie, and 61.9% of creators run both. Below them the field drops away sharply: TikTok reaches 47.4%, YouTube 29.6%. Threads, despite two years of existence, sits at 8.8%. The quiet workhorse is the link hub — the link-in-bio page served by Linktree, Beacons and similar tools: 51.7% of creators route their audience through one, against just 7.6% who run an actual website. The industry’s homepage is a link in a bio.

The typical creator maintains exactly three public channels (median; mean 3.04), and the distribution is remarkably tight — only 41 of 1,244 profiles run seven or more. Set against the 90.6% who publish on a single adult platform, the pattern is clear: one storefront, a handful of doors leading to it.

No audience, no paywall

The sharpest divide in this section is not between channels — it is between creators who have any and creators who have none. Of the 191 creators with no public channel at all, 86.9% offer free access. Among the 1,053 with at least one channel, that figure is 43.2%. Reach is what makes it possible to charge in the first place.

What reach does not do is push the price up. If anything the reverse: among paid OnlyFans pages, the typical price falls steadily as the channel count rises — $9.00 for creators with two channels, $7.00 with four, $5.00 with six or more. The creators with the widest reach run the cheapest doors. That is exactly the sub-$10 playbook, executed by the people best equipped to execute it: pull a large audience in cheaply, monetise behind the paywall. We can show the correlation, not the cause — creators with large followings may simply be more likely to be professionally managed, and affiliate-partnered profiles are unevenly distributed across these groups. But the direction is unambiguous, and it is the opposite of what the industry assumes.

One consistent detail: paid creators maintain far more social presence than free-page creators (84% against 61% on both Instagram and X), and only 4.0% of paid creators have no channel at all, against 26.7% of free-page creators. An established audience is what lets a creator charge — consistent with the age curve above.

Regional snapshot

North America is the cheapest market in our sample, with a typical paid price of $5.32 — against $7.50 in Western and $7.99 in Eastern Europe. The starkest single comparison: German creators charge a 39% higher typical price than US creators ($7.50 against $5.39). With 300 German and 325 American profiles, this is one of the better-sampled cross-country comparisons available anywhere. Country-level browsing for every figure in this section is available on our country pages.

What the data means — three takeaways

For fans: the sticker price tells you almost nothing about quality any more. Half the market opens for free, two thirds of paid pages sit under $10, and the expensive platforms host the same creators at higher prices. Compare before you subscribe — that gap is exactly what a directory is for.

For creators: the market has converged on a playbook, and our numbers show what it looks like. Building an audience comes first: creators with no public channel are almost never in a position to charge at all. But the audience is not a licence to raise the price — the widest-reaching creators in our sample run the cheapest pages and take their money behind the door, through messages and pay-per-view. That is the funnel pattern, and it is what the hybrid setup of one in five paid creators looks like in practice: a cheap VIP page plus a free feeder. Our data can’t prove this causes success, but it clearly shows where the market has moved.

For the platforms: the price ladder is now part of the product. OnlyFans competes on reach and volume, Fansly and LoyalFans monetise as premium second storefronts. If that ladder holds, expect the H2 edition to show the gap widening rather than closing.

Methodology & limitations

The FanBrowse Creator Price Index H1 2026 is a full snapshot of the FanBrowse directory taken on July 3, 2026: 1,244 published creator profiles, each individually researched, with platform links confirmed against the creator’s own official channels and subscription prices entered manually during verification — the process is documented in our Editorial Guidelines. All paid-price figures are calculated from the 692 OnlyFans, 141 Fansly, 29 LoyalFans and 18 Fanvue pages with a confirmed price above zero. “Free access” means a verified free page, free trial link or $0 subscription at snapshot time. A “public channel” means one of the eleven channel types we record — Instagram, X, TikTok, YouTube, Threads, Telegram, Snapchat, Twitch, Facebook, link hub and website — with a link confirmed during verification. Wherever this report says “typical price”, it means the median — the middle value, which unlike an average isn’t distorted by a handful of very expensive pages.

Limitations, stated plainly: this is a curated directory sample, not a census of the full platforms. Established creators with a public presence are overrepresented, and so are Germany and the USA, which together make up about half the sample. The Fanvue and LoyalFans groups are small; treat their figures as indicative. A creator counted here as having no public channel has none verified in our directory — an unlinked or newly created account would not appear, so this figure is a floor, not a census of the open web. The relationship between reach and price is a correlation across groups of profiles, not a measured effect within any single creator’s pricing history. We publish no revenue, payout or conversion data — supply-side prices only. The fan-spending context referenced above comes from OnlyTraffic’s published transaction analysis (May 2026) and is labelled as such; it is not our data.

Research & analysis: Normen Zedler, Founder & Editor of FanBrowse. Every profile behind these figures was researched and verified by hand.