LinkedIn Video Ads Benchmarks 2026: CTR, View Rates, and the Efficiency Question

Video ads get 31.72% of total LinkedIn ad budgets. That is the second largest allocation after single image ads. And yet, video delivers the lowest efficiency score of any LinkedIn ad format – 1.5 out of 10. I am not saying video is useless. I am saying most teams are spending way too much on it relative to what it returns. After analyzing 211 companies and $5.5M in LinkedIn ad spend for the ZenABM 2026 benchmarks report, the data paints a very clear picture: video is a brand awareness tool, not a performance marketing tool. And teams that treat it as both end up wasting budget. This post breaks down every video ad benchmark from our dataset so you can set realistic expectations and allocate budget accordingly.

Video Ads Benchmarks – Key Takeaways

• Video’s median CTR is 0.24% – the lowest of any LinkedIn ad format. Median CPC is $15.61, the highest. Every $1,000 spent gets you about 62 landing page clicks.
• Video’s CPM ($38.94) is the lowest among sponsored content formats. This is video’s genuine strength – cheap impressions for brand awareness.
• 60.5% of viewers do not finish watching. Median watch time is 5.86 seconds. Front-load your message or it will not land.
• Efficiency score of 1.5 out of 10 – the worst of any format. Most teams over-invest in video relative to its performance outcomes.
• Keep videos under 15-30 seconds for the best completion rates (25-45%). Videos over 60 seconds should only target warm, retargeting audiences.
• Reallocate budget from 30% to 10-15%. Shift the rest toward Thought Leader Ads and single image ads for better cost per click and cost per outcome.

Video Ads Benchmarks at a Glance

Here is the full picture from our 2026 dataset – 211 companies, 2,828 total ads analyzed, with video ads making up a significant portion of the spend.

Two numbers jump out. First, the CPM: at $38.94, video has the lowest CPM of any sponsored content format on LinkedIn. That makes it the cheapest way to get impressions. Second, the efficiency score of 1.5 – the lowest of any format. That means when you factor in cost per meaningful outcome (clicks, conversions, pipeline), video ranks dead last. That disconnect between cheap impressions and expensive outcomes is the central tension of LinkedIn video ads. Let me dig into the details.

Video Ads CTR and CPC Benchmarks

The median CTR for LinkedIn video ads is 0.24%. To put that in context:

• Single image ads deliver a 0.42% median CTR – 75% higher
• Thought Leader Ads deliver a 2.68% median CTR – more than 11x higher
• Even carousel ads at 0.32% outperform video on CTR

That low CTR drives a high CPC. At $15.61 median CPC, video is the most expensive LinkedIn ad format per click. Single image ads cost $13.23 per click (15% cheaper), and Thought Leader Ads in ABM campaigns cost just $2.29 (7x cheaper). Let me put it in dollar terms. For every $1,000 you spend on video ads, you get approximately 62 landing page clicks. That same $1,000 on single image ads gets you about 71 clicks. On Thought Leader Ads, you get around 327 clicks. Same budget, dramatically different outcomes.

Why is video CTR so low? Two reasons. First, videos auto-play in the feed, which means LinkedIn registers an impression even when someone is just scrolling past. The impression count is inflated, which deflates the CTR percentage. Second, video content encourages watching rather than clicking. Someone who watches your 15-second product demo might feel informed enough without needing to click through – which is fine for awareness but terrible for direct response campaigns.

The CPM advantage

Here is where video gets interesting. At a $38.94 median CPM, video delivers the cheapest impressions among sponsored content formats. Single image ads cost $59.15 CPM. Thought Leader Ads cost $49.37 CPM. Carousel ads cost $45.28 CPM. This is why so many teams over-invest in video. The CPM looks efficient. You run a video campaign, see tons of impressions at a low cost, and feel like you are getting good value. But impressions without clicks or conversions are just vanity metrics. The low CPM is a trap if your goal is anything beyond raw brand exposure.

Video View-Through and Completion Rate Benchmarks

The median view-through rate for LinkedIn video ads is 39.5%. That means 60.5% of people who start watching your video do not finish it. And keep in mind what LinkedIn counts as a “view” – 2 seconds of playback with at least 50% of pixels in view. Since videos auto-play in the feed, someone scrolling slowly past your ad already counts as a “view.” Real engagement is lower than the view counts suggest. Here are the other watch metrics from our data:

• Average watch time: 6.54 seconds
• Median watch time: 5.86 seconds
• Median dwell time: 3.91 seconds
• Engagement rate: 1.6% (vs 0.5% for non-video sponsored content)

That 1.6% engagement rate is worth noting – it is 3x higher than non-video formats. People are more likely to like, comment, or share a video ad than a static image ad. If organic engagement and social proof matter to your campaign goals, video has an edge there.

Completion rates by video length

This is one of the most useful benchmark tables for planning your video creative. Shorter videos get dramatically better completion rates.

The takeaway is straightforward. If you are running video ads, keep them under 30 seconds. Ideally under 15 seconds. With a median watch time of 5.86 seconds, your key message needs to land almost immediately. Anything that requires a 30-second build-up before delivering value is going to lose the majority of your audience. For videos longer than 60 seconds, reserve those exclusively for retargeting warm audiences – people who already know your brand and have a reason to invest the time.

How Video Ads Compare to Other LinkedIn Ad Formats

Here is the side-by-side comparison across all major LinkedIn ad formats from our 2026 benchmarks dataset. This puts video’s strengths and weaknesses in proper context.

Video wins on exactly two metrics: CPM and engagement rate. It loses on everything else. The 1.5 efficiency score compared to single image (3.2) and Thought Leader Ads (9.5) tells the full story. When you measure cost per meaningful outcome rather than cost per impression, video is the least efficient way to spend your LinkedIn ad budget. And yet it gets 31.72% of budget – more than 3x what Thought Leader Ads get. That imbalance is the single biggest budget optimization opportunity I see across the companies in our dataset.

When Video Ads Make Sense (and When They Do Not)

Given these benchmarks, here is how I think about video allocation.

Video makes sense for:

• Brand awareness campaigns where you want maximum impressions at the lowest CPM. Video’s $38.94 CPM is genuinely the cheapest reach among sponsored content formats.
• Retargeting warm audiences who already know your brand. Video CTR jumps to 0.5%+ when shown to people who have visited your website or engaged with prior ads.
• Products that require motion to understand – dynamic dashboards, workflow tools, real-time visualizations. If a screenshot cannot convey the value, video is justified.
• Customer testimonials where seeing and hearing a real person builds trust that text alone cannot match. Keep these under 45 seconds.

Video does not make sense for:

• Direct response campaigns where you need clicks and conversions. The 0.24% CTR and $15.61 CPC make video the worst format for driving landing page traffic.
• Cold prospecting at the top of funnel where single image ads or Thought Leader Ads deliver far more clicks per dollar.
• Anything that requires a long setup before the value is clear. With 5.86 seconds of median watch time, there is no room for build-up.
• Content that works equally well as a static image or GIF. In our ABM Bootcamp, a 2-minute GIF consistently outperformed a video that took two full days to produce.

My general recommendation: allocate 10-15% of your LinkedIn ad budget to video, not 30%+. Use the savings to fund Thought Leader Ads and single image ads, which deliver significantly more clicks per dollar spent.

FAQs

What is a good CTR for LinkedIn video ads in 2026?

The median CTR across our dataset of 211 companies is 0.24%. If your video ads are hitting 0.3% or above, you are performing above the median. For retargeting campaigns targeting warm audiences, aim for 0.5%+. Keep in mind that video CTR will almost always be lower than single image ads (0.42% median) and significantly lower than Thought Leader Ads (2.68% median). That is not necessarily a failure – it reflects how people interact with video content in the feed. They watch rather than click.

How long should LinkedIn video ads be?

Under 15 seconds is the sweet spot for cold audiences, with 35-45% completion rates. For retargeting warm audiences who already know your brand, 15-30 seconds works well (25-35% completion). Anything over 60 seconds should only be used for retargeting – completion rates drop below 25%, and with a median watch time of 5.86 seconds, most of your video will never be seen. Your key message needs to land in the first 3-5 seconds regardless of total video length.

Are LinkedIn video ads worth the investment compared to other formats?

It depends entirely on your campaign goal. For brand awareness and cheap impressions, video’s $38.94 CPM makes it the most cost-effective sponsored content format. For driving clicks, conversions, or pipeline, video is the worst performer – $15.61 CPC vs $2.29 for Thought Leader Ads. The data shows most companies allocate 31.72% of budget to video but would see better overall results shifting that down to 10-15% and reallocating toward higher-efficiency formats. Use video strategically for awareness and retargeting, not as a default format for every campaign.