Industry surveyInfluencer Strategists, 4 May 2026
Marketers are much more likely to track engagement rate than efficiency metrics, with engagement monitored by 91% but EMV per working spend tracked by only 9%
Performance measurement
| KPI | Tracked by (%) |
|---|---|
| Engagement rate (likes, comments, shares) — How many people interacted | 91% |
| Impressions / reach (How many people saw it) | 84% |
| Click-through rate (How many people clicked) | 78% |
| Sales / revenue attribution (Whether people bought) | 72% |
| Customer acquisition cost (CAC) — What each customer cost | 72% |
| Return on ad spend (ROAS) — Revenue per dollar spent | 66% |
| Positive / negative sentiment (Whether people liked it) | 56% |
| Brand lift (awareness, consideration) — Whether perceptions shifted | 47% |
| Earned media value (EMV) — What the coverage was worth | 44% |
| Search volume uplift (Whether people searched) | 44% |
| EMV per working spend (efficiency ratio) — Whether the spend was efficient | 9% |
Share of marketers tracking each influencer campaign KPI (%)
- Reader Note:
- There is a strong preference for activity over efficiency metrics.
- Evidence:
- Self-reported behaviour
- Vendor interest:
- Moderate — This comes from a company with a commercial interest in this market, so it is not a neutral source.
- Sample:
- Survey of 41 senior influencer marketing practitioners; sample skewed toward agencies and consultants (63% combined), with minimal brand-side representation (2%).
Good for
A rough sense of size and direction, and deciding what to look at first.
Not for
- Exact numbers, or saying that one thing caused another.
- The source never says when this data was collected. It could be considerably older than the publication date suggests.
- This comes from a company with a commercial interest in this market, so it is not a neutral source.
- The source says how much it looked at, but not how any of it was chosen.




