“What is a good CTR for LinkedIn ads?” is the most common question I get from B2B marketers. The answer everyone gives is somewhere between 0.4% and 0.65%. That range is technically correct – and completely useless. A 0.4% CTR on a Thought Leader Ad means something is broken. A 0.4% CTR on a single image ad means you are performing right at median. And a 0.4% CTR on a video ad means you are nearly double the benchmark. The “good CTR” answer depends entirely on the ad format you are running. For our 2026 LinkedIn ABM Benchmarks Report, I analyzed 161,256 LinkedIn ads across 211 companies. In this post, I am breaking down CTR benchmarks for every LinkedIn ad format, showing you what “good” actually looks like for each one, and sharing what might be the most important finding: higher CTR does not predict more pipeline (the correlation is actually negative). Here is what you will learn:
This is the table most people come here for. These are median CTR values from 161,256 LinkedIn ads across 211 companies, pulled from the ZenABM 2026 benchmarks dataset.
| Ad Format | Median CTR | Median CPC | LP Clicks per $1K Spend |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thought Leader Ads (TLAs) | 2.68% | $2.29 | 327 |
| Event Ads | 0.55% | – | – |
| Document Ads | 0.43% | – | – |
| Single Image Ads | 0.42% | $13.23 | 71 |
| Carousel Ads | 0.32% | $13.30 | – |
| Video Ads | 0.24% | $15.61 | 62 |
| Dynamic/Spotlight Ads | 0.08% | – | – |
| Text Ads | 0.02% | – | – |
A few things jump out immediately. Thought Leader Ads have a CTR that is 6.4x higher than single image ads and over 11x higher than video. That is not a marginal difference – it is an entirely different category of performance. The CPC impact is just as dramatic. TLAs at 2.68% CTR deliver a $2.29 CPC. Single image ads at 0.42% CTR come in at $13.23. LinkedIn’s auction rewards higher engagement with lower costs per click, which means TLAs give you roughly 4.6x more landing page clicks per dollar spent. But before you shift your entire budget to TLAs, keep reading. CTR is not the full story – and the pipeline data tells a very different narrative. 
A 134x difference between the highest CTR format (TLAs at 2.68%) and the lowest (text ads at 0.02%) seems extreme. But it makes sense when you understand what drives clicks on each format.
Text ads and dynamic/spotlight ads appear in the right rail and top banner of LinkedIn – areas most users have learned to ignore completely. Feed-based formats (TLAs, single image, video, carousel, document) show up in the main content stream where attention naturally flows. This placement difference alone accounts for a 5-20x CTR gap.
TLAs come from individual profiles. They look and feel like organic posts from real people. Single image ads come from company pages with a clear “Sponsored” label. People engage with people. That is why TLAs consistently outperform every company-page ad format.
Video ads and carousel ads are designed for on-platform consumption. People watch the video or swipe through the cards – that counts as engagement, but it does not register as a click. Document ads work similarly: users read the document inside LinkedIn. This is why these formats have lower CTRs but can still deliver strong results.
When you look at how long people actually spend with each format, the CTR ranking shuffles:
TLAs win on both CTR and dwell time. But carousels – despite their lower 0.32% CTR – hold attention 25% longer than single image ads. If your goal is brand recall and education rather than clicks, carousel dwell time matters more than CTR.
This is the question that brought you here – and the honest answer is that “good” depends on what you are trying to achieve with each format. Here is how I think about it:
| Campaign Purpose | Best Format | “Good” CTR | Primary Metric Instead |
|---|---|---|---|
| Awareness / Top of Funnel | Thought Leader Ads | 2.0%+ | Dwell time, engagement rate |
| Mid-Funnel / Consideration | Single Image Ads | 0.4%+ | Landing page conversion rate |
| Education / Nurture | Video Ads | 0.24%+ | View rate, completion rate |
| Storytelling / Multi-point | Carousel Ads | 0.3%+ | Card progression rate, dwell time |
| Deanonymization / Retargeting | Text Ads | Does not matter | CPM (target ~$2) |
Let me explain the logic behind each one. TLAs at 2%+ are “good” because the median is 2.68%. If you are below 2%, your creative is underperforming relative to what this format can deliver. The fix is usually in the copy structure – more on that below. Single image ads at 0.4%+ are “good” because that is right at median. These ads are doing the heavy lifting for mid-funnel conversions, so what really matters is whether the landing page converts those clicks, not just the click itself. Video ads at 0.24%+ are fine because video is an on-platform format. People watch without clicking. Measure view rate and completion rate instead. A video ad with 0.15% CTR but 35% view rate is doing exactly what it should. Text ads – CTR literally does not matter. I use text ads for one purpose: website visitor deanonymization at a ~$2 CPM. You are paying for impressions, not clicks. Nobody clicks text ads, and that is perfectly fine.
Geography affects CTR more than most marketers realize. From our dataset, here are the median CTR numbers for sponsored content by region:
| Geography | Median CTR (Sponsored Content) |
|---|---|
| Netherlands | 0.72% |
| UK | 0.55% |
| US | 0.52% |
| Global Average | 0.44-0.65% |
The Netherlands consistently outperforms the US and UK by a noticeable margin. This is likely a function of lower ad saturation in smaller markets combined with higher engagement norms on the platform. If you are running campaigns across multiple geographies, do not compare them against a single benchmark. A 0.50% CTR in the US is solid. The same 0.50% in the Netherlands is below average. The overall sponsored content CTR range of 0.44-0.65% globally is what you will see cited most often in industry reports. That number is accurate as a blended average across all feed-based formats. But as the format-level data shows, it masks enormous variation.
This is the finding that surprised me the most – and the one that matters the most for anyone running LinkedIn ads to generate revenue. When I correlated CTR with pipeline generation across 211 companies, the Spearman correlation came back at rho = -0.170. That is a negative correlation. Companies with higher CTR did not generate more pipeline. If anything, the relationship trended in the opposite direction. 
Why would this be the case? A few explanations: High-CTR formats attract broad engagement, not buyer intent. TLAs get 2.68% CTR partly because they feel like organic content. People click, read, and engage – including people who will never buy your product. The engagement is real, but it is not always purchase-intent engagement. Lower-CTR formats often carry stronger intent signals. Someone who clicks a single image ad with a clear product message and goes to a landing page is demonstrating more intent than someone who clicks a TLA to read an interesting perspective. The CTR is lower, but the click quality is higher. Pipeline is a function of targeting and offer, not click volume. You can drive 327 landing page clicks per $1K with TLAs versus 71 with single image ads. But if those 71 single image clicks come from a tightly targeted account list with a relevant offer, they will outperform the 327 broader TLA clicks every time. This does not mean you should ignore CTR. It means you should not optimize for CTR at the expense of everything else. The companies generating the most pipeline from LinkedIn use a mix of formats – TLAs for reach and awareness, single image ads for conversion, and measure attribution at the pipeline level rather than the click level.
Now that you know the benchmarks and understand that CTR is not the only metric that matters, here is how to improve it where it actually helps – broken down by format.
Our analysis of top-performing Thought Leader Ads revealed two dominant creative patterns: 65% of the highest-CTR TLAs use first-person “I” voice. Not “we” or “our company” – literal first-person storytelling. “I spent 3 months testing this…” or “I made this mistake last quarter…” The personal voice is what makes TLAs work in the first place. Leaning into it harder drives more engagement. 75% of top TLAs place the link in the bottom 25% of the text. This is counterintuitive. Most advertisers want to put the link early – “above the fold” thinking. But the data shows the opposite. People who read through a full TLA post and then click the link at the bottom are more engaged and more likely to convert. The post itself does the selling. The link is just the mechanism to continue. Other patterns in high-performing TLAs:
If your TLAs are below 2% CTR, start with the voice. Are the posts written like a human being sharing something they learned, or do they read like a marketing brief dressed up as a personal post? That distinction is usually the difference between 1.5% and 3%+ CTR.
Single image ads are the workhorse of most LinkedIn campaigns – and they have the most room for systematic optimization. Here is what moves the needle: The headline-image alignment test. Cover the ad copy and look only at the image and headline. Can you understand the offer in under 3 seconds? If not, you have an alignment problem. The best-performing single image ads deliver one clear message through the visual and one clear action through the headline. When these two fight each other, CTR drops. 
Specificity beats creativity. “Reduce churn by 23% with in-app surveys” outperforms “Transform your customer experience” every time. B2B buyers on LinkedIn are scanning quickly. Specific numbers, specific outcomes, and specific audiences in the ad copy all improve CTR. Vague value propositions get scrolled past. 
Social proof in the intro text. Mentioning a recognizable customer name, a concrete result, or a credible data point in the first line of the intro text increases stop rate – the percentage of people who pause scrolling long enough to read the full ad. More stop rate leads directly to more CTR. CTA button selection matters. LinkedIn gives you options like “Learn More,” “Download,” “Sign Up,” and “Register.” Match the CTA to the actual landing page experience. “Learn More” works best for content-heavy offers. “Download” works best for gated assets. Mismatched CTAs create a disconnect that hurts click-through. 
Video ads have the lowest CTR of any feed-based format at 0.24%. But as I mentioned, CTR is the wrong primary metric for video. Still, if you want to improve it: The first 3 seconds determine everything. LinkedIn autoplays video with sound off. If those opening frames do not communicate what the video is about and why someone should watch, they scroll. Use text overlays in the first 3 seconds that tell people what they will learn. Avoid logo animations or generic intros. Keep videos under 30 seconds for CTR optimization. Shorter videos get higher completion rates, and people who complete a video are more likely to click through. If you need longer content, consider using carousel or document ads instead and reserving video for quick-hit messages. Add a clear verbal and visual CTA at the end. Do not rely on the LinkedIn CTA button alone. Include a text overlay in the final frames that tells viewers exactly what to do next. “See the full benchmark report at [URL]” drives more clicks than a generic “Learn More” button.
Carousel CTR at 0.32% is decent – but the real opportunity is in card progression. Getting people to swipe from Card 1 to Card 5+ is where carousels start generating meaningful engagement. Here is how: Card 1 is a hook, not a summary. The biggest carousel mistake is putting the conclusion on Card 1. Instead, use Card 1 to create curiosity. I analyzed 500 LinkedIn ads. Here is what the top 10% do differently.” That structure pulls people into Card 2. Each card must justify the next swipe. Every card should end with an implied “and here is why…” or “the next part is even more interesting.” When I see carousels with 4.56 seconds of dwell time (25% higher than single image), it is almost always because the card sequence creates a narrative pull. Place the CTA on the last card only. Putting CTA cards in the middle of the sequence breaks the flow. Let people consume the content, build conviction through the story, and then give them one clear action on the final card.
Here is what you should take away from this data:
The average CTR for LinkedIn sponsored content (feed-based ads) is 0.44-0.65% globally. But this blended number hides massive format-level variation. Thought Leader Ads average 2.68% CTR, single image ads average 0.42%, video ads average 0.24%, and text ads average just 0.02%. Always benchmark against your specific ad format rather than using a single overall average.
First, check if your CTR is actually low for your specific format. A 0.25% CTR on video ads is above median – that is not low at all. If your CTR genuinely underperforms the benchmarks for your format, the most common culprits are: weak headline-image alignment on single image ads, corporate voice instead of personal voice on TLAs, targeting that is too broad (which lowers relevance scores), or ad creative that has been running too long and hit frequency fatigue.
Not necessarily. In our analysis of 211 companies, the correlation between CTR and pipeline generation was rho = -0.170 – meaning it was slightly negative. Higher CTR does reduce your CPC (LinkedIn rewards engagement with lower auction prices), so you get more clicks per dollar. But those clicks do not automatically translate to pipeline or revenue. The companies generating the most pipeline optimize for targeting precision and offer quality, not click volume.
A good CTR for LinkedIn Thought Leader Ads is 2.0% or above, with the median being 2.68%. If you are below 2%, your creative is underperforming. The most effective TLAs use first-person “I” voice (65% of top performers), place links in the bottom 25% of the post text (75% of top performers), and average 6.63 seconds of dwell time. Focus on writing posts that sound authentically personal rather than corporate messaging disguised as a personal post.
LinkedIn’s auction system rewards higher-engagement ads with lower costs per click. TLAs at 2.68% CTR average just $2.29 CPC, while single image ads at 0.42% CTR average $13.23 CPC. That means $1,000 spent on TLAs buys you 327 landing page clicks, compared to just 71 landing page clicks from single image ads. Higher CTR formats are dramatically more cost-efficient on a per-click basis – though click quality and intent also vary by format.
