Video Marketing Statistics Updated November 2026

Human Written & Fact Checked · Updated

100 Video Marketing Statistics for 2026

A video view is not a sale, and a survey answer is not a financial return. Use these findings to distinguish production choices, distribution workflows, webinar engagement and advertising investment before choosing a benchmark.

This collection draws on original publishers with verified publication dates. Webinar findings remain explicitly limited to that format; hosted-video analytics describe platform populations, and spending forecasts remain separate from completed annual market results.

Updated November 2026. Publication dates do not replace data periods: Wistia reports preceding-year activity and report-year plans, Livestorm combines preceding-year platform activity with a year-end survey, and IAB distinguishes buyer surveys from forecasts. Older AI fieldwork is presented as historical evidence instead of current adoption.

Headline figures

  • In Livestorm's webinar-experienced survey sample, 94% of marketing respondents said their teams actively ran webinars. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • In Livestorm's December 2025 survey, 69.4% of respondents planned to use webinars for lead generation in 2026. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • In Wistia's 2026 report, 40% of respondents planned to increase their video production budgets. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • In Wistia's 2026 report, 48% of respondents planned to increase their video promotion budgets. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Among Wistia's surveyed teams, 81% used LinkedIn to distribute video. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • In Livestorm's December 2025 survey, 32.2% of respondents repurposed webinars into social clips. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • On Livestorm, average webinar watch time was 26 minutes in its 2025 platform dataset. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • In Livestorm's 2025 platform dataset, 49.7% of webinar registrations arrived in the final seven days before the event. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • In Wistia's 2026 report, 90% of respondents reported implementing video accessibility measures. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • In Wistia's 2026 report, 57% of respondents spent more time creating videos than promoting them. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • IAB's May 2026 forecast put U.S. digital video advertising expenditure above $80 billion for 2026. (IAB / Advertiser Perceptions / Guideline, May 2026)
  • IAB Europe estimated European video advertising expenditure at €34 billion in 2025. (IAB Europe, Jul 2026)

Browse video marketing statistics

How do business teams use webinars?

Webinars give a concrete view of business video use, but they are only one format. Department-level participation in a webinar survey cannot establish adoption of video marketing among all companies.

Which surveyed teams actively run webinars?

  • Sales respondents running webinars: 95.5%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Growth respondents running webinars: 90.6%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Executive respondents running webinars: 90.4%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Communications respondents running webinars: 86.5%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)

Sales, growth, executive and communications respondents report active webinar involvement. These findings describe people in the Livestorm survey, not the percentage of every department worldwide that uses video. The report presents different overall sample counts before and after exclusions and does not provide a separate denominator for each department. All participants had already hosted a webinar; the departmental figures therefore describe reported practice within that selected group, not adoption among non-users. Participation also does not reveal how frequently a team hosts events, the size of its audience or whether its programme is profitable. Use the figures to understand the range of roles involved in webinars instead of to estimate national adoption.

What do teams plan to use webinars for?

  • Planned product-demonstration webinars: 61.9%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Planned customer-training webinars: 42.8%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Planned thought-leadership webinars: 36.7%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Planned advisory-session webinars: 28.1%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar hosts broadcasting monthly: 46%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)

Product demonstrations, customer training and thought leadership appear among planned webinar uses. These are intentions from Livestorm's year-end survey, and respondents may select multiple purposes. The categories are not mutually exclusive shares of event output. Wistia separately reports hosting cadence among its webinar-hosting respondents; frequency describes execution instead of a planned use case. Neither source demonstrates that adding events causes better results. A useful programme begins with a defined audience question, identifies what a live interaction can contribute, and then measures whether the event served that purpose.

What do businesses spend on video?

Making a video and distributing it are different expenses. Keep reported spending bands, future budget plans and perceived constraints separate when comparing investment.

How do production plans differ from promotion spending?

  • Production budgets held flat: 46%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Promotion spending below $20,000: 41%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Promotion spending above $20,000: 28%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)

Wistia distinguishes production budgets from spending on promotion and advertising. The production finding below concerns plans for the report year; the promotion bands describe spending in the preceding year. Keeping a budget flat is not the same as investing nothing, and spending above a threshold does not reveal an average. The survey does not provide enough information to calculate a universal cost per asset. Before comparing an internal budget with these findings, decide whether staff time, contractors, software and distribution belong in the same accounting category. Preserve those definitions when reviewing changes over time.

How do webinar budgets relate to paid promotion?

  • Webinar budgets below $10,000: about 80%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Paid-social top-three registration channel: 20.4%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar budget constraints cited: 9.9%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)

Wistia reports an annual webinar spending band, while Livestorm reports budget constraints and the role of paid social in generating registrations. These are separate populations and questions. A top-three registration channel is a channel respondents value; it is not a measured share of their media spending or a conversion rate. A reported budget constraint likewise does not establish that a larger allocation would improve performance. Keep annual programme costs distinct from individual-event costs, and define whether preparation, production, promotion and follow-up are included before comparing the figures. Compare like-for-like programmes before setting a spending target.

How are videos distributed and repurposed?

Distribution is part of production planning. Full-length uploads, social excerpts and registration campaigns serve different audience actions, so their benchmarks should remain distinct.

Where do teams distribute and adapt videos?

  • YouTube video distribution: 76%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Platform-specific aspect-ratio adaptation: 76%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • LinkedIn clip distribution: 67%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Instagram clip distribution: 49%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • YouTube clip distribution: 41%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Facebook clip distribution: 34%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Social clips linking to websites: 60%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)

Wistia separates broader video distribution from sharing repurposed clips. Aspect-ratio adaptation describes preparation for a platform, while a website link describes an intended destination instead of a completed visit. None of these measures establishes which platform delivers the best return. Compare the figures within their question and respondent group. A complete video and a short excerpt can play different roles, so a channel strategy should account for audience intent and the next action the content supports.

What do teams produce from webinar recordings?

  • Webinar repurposing into on-demand recordings: 66.5%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar repurposing into nurture emails: 27.1%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar repurposing into blog/SEO articles: 25%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar repurposing into audio: 10.5%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar repurposing into sales snippets: 9.5%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Teams reusing webinar material: almost 90%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)

Livestorm reports the assets teams make from webinar material; Wistia separately asks whether teams reuse it at all. Those measures are complementary but are not interchangeable adoption rates. A recording can support several outputs, so the asset shares should not be summed into an exclusive allocation. Reuse also does not guarantee additional reach or leads. Assess the relevance of each derivative asset to its destination, and track it separately from the original event when evaluating performance.

Which formats and registration channels are planned?

  • Testimonial production planned: 47%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Podcast production planned: 21%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Email among top-three registration channels: 86.3%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Organic-social top-three registration channel: 43.3%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)

Wistia's future production plans identify content formats, while Livestorm's promotion answers identify channels respondents rank among their leading sources of webinar registrations. A podcast plan is not proof of a published video podcast, and the survey does not establish the share that will include video. Likewise, email and organic social rankings describe reported channel importance instead of measured attribution. The useful connection is operational: decide which audience action a format supports, then choose distribution that reaches that audience. Keep plans separate from completed output and preserve the question wording when using a benchmark.

What outcomes and engagement does video deliver?

Different video metrics answer different questions. Website play rates, webinar attendance and the proportion of a replay watched do not share a denominator, and none is automatically a financial return.

What do website play rates and video forms measure?

  • Thank-you-page video play rate: 10%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Contact-page video play rate: 10%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • 5–30-minute video forms: 53–55% CTR. (Wistia, Apr 2026)

Wistia's website play rate measures visitors who start a video on the relevant page. Its interactive-form result concerns lead-generation forms within a specified video-length range and placement, instead of all visitors to a site. The source identifies the first, second and fourth quarters of those videos as the placements behind the reported form range. Do not compare that rate directly with page-level starts. Both measures can help diagnose a step in the journey, but they do not establish downstream sales or prove that a particular placement caused a better business result. Preserve each denominator in campaign reporting.

When do webinar registrants sign up and attend?

  • Mean webinar length: 68 minutes. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Registrations on event day: 15.3%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Registered webinar attendance: about 40%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)

Livestorm measures event length and registration timing in its platform dataset; Wistia separately reports attendance among registrants for its hosted webinars. The samples and definitions differ, so the findings should not be merged into a single event model. Late registration may affect reminder and staffing plans, but the observed timing does not prove when promotional spending works best. Event length also differs from the amount of content an attendee watches. Keep registration, attendance and viewing duration in separate reporting fields so a change in one is not mistaken for improvement in another. Document those distinctions alongside the results.

How do replays and follow-up perform?

  • Webinars receiving plays after three months: one-third. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Typical on-demand webinar engagement: 15–20%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • 31–45-minute replay engagement: over twice shorter replays. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Registration-to-attendance conversion difficulty: 54.2%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Driving webinar registrations difficulty: 43.6%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar follow-up difficulty: 38.2%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar attribution/integration difficulty: 21.8%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)

Wistia's replay findings describe continuing plays and average viewing engagement. Its length comparison uses replays under thirty minutes as the shorter group and does not establish that extending a session causes stronger engagement. Livestorm's difficulty responses describe reported operational problems, not measured failure rates. Attribution difficulties can persist even when an event attracts attention. Use these findings to distinguish an audience problem from a follow-up or measurement problem before choosing a change to the programme.

How are AI and production workflows changing?

A video workflow includes accessibility, production, distribution and measurement. The evidence below separates operational observations from dated AI survey answers; a recent publication does not make older fieldwork a current adoption estimate.

What constrains production and repurposing?

  • Vertical-HD uploads increased 24%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • 4K uploads increased 16%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • 720p uploads decreased 8%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Square-video uploads decreased 4%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • At-least-monthly video production: 76%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • More promotion than creation time: 20%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Equal creation/promotion time: 23%. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Highest-volume producers: 41% greater in-house-team reliance. (Wistia, Apr 2026)
  • Webinar production-quality difficulty: 26.3%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Repurposing bottleneck, time/bandwidth: 32.3%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)
  • Webinar repurposing difficulty: 11.5%. (Livestorm, Sep 2026)

Wistia's upload changes describe its platform, while its workflow answers describe surveyed teams. The highest-volume comparison concerns producers exceeding the source's annual volume threshold. Livestorm's webinar difficulties and repurposing bottleneck use separate questions; they must not be combined into a single obstacle ranking.

Where do respondents use or test AI?

IAB's advertising buyers distinguish operating, testing, planning and investigating agentic campaign tools. Livestorm asks about specific webinar tasks. Its answers come from late-year fieldwork before the report year, so they are historical workflow observations. Agentic campaign management and assistance with scripts or clips are different activities. Neither survey establishes how effectively a tool performs or how many staff hours it saves. Keep the adoption stage and task attached to each figure instead of presenting them as a universal AI-use rate.

What AI controls and future changes do buyers expect?

IAB's governance findings express buyer preferences instead of proof that safeguards exist. Smaller-spender answers apply only to that subgroup. The future creative-share estimate is a forecast about assets using generative AI, not agentic campaign adoption. These distinctions matter when assessing a vendor: a request for oversight, explainability or limits does not establish implementation, and dissatisfaction with current usage does not establish a plan to spend more. Evaluate actual controls separately from the market's stated expectations.

How large is the digital video advertising market?

Advertising expenditure measures paid distribution, not the total value of video marketing. Keep forecast vintages, completed-year estimates and national currencies explicit instead of forcing them into a single market total.

What growth did IAB forecast for U.S. video advertising?

IAB's U.S. forecast covers digital video, including connected television, social video and online video. The component growth rates are not separate markets to add to the total. The digital share uses television/video advertising as its denominator, not all advertising. These expectations describe the report year and remain forecasts until replaced by completed-year evidence. Spending growth indicates demand for purchased distribution, but it does not establish that an advertiser's returns grew or that production budgets increased. Keep the release vintage attached when comparing a forecast with a later revision.

How did European and Australian video advertising change?

  • European video-ad growth: 19.6%. (IAB Europe, Jul 2026)
  • European social-video growth: 25.7%. (IAB Europe, Jul 2026)
  • Australian video advertising: A$5.4 billion. (IAB Australia, May 2026)
  • Australian video-ad growth: 19.8%. (IAB Australia, May 2026)
  • Australian digital-ad share attributable to video: 29%. (IAB Australia, May 2026)

The European and Australian findings describe the preceding calendar year, unlike the U.S. forecasts. Their currencies and geographic coverage remain explicit. European social-video growth is a format-specific result instead of growth in all social advertising, and Australia's share uses its national digital-advertising market as the denominator. Do not add these values into a global total or assume that every source uses identical format definitions. They provide evidence of the scale and reported movement of paid video investment within their respective markets, not a direct comparison of campaign efficiency.

What influences buyers' confidence and purchasing criteria?

Inventory confidence describes buyers' perceptions, not an independently measured fraud rate. Views about live content describe perceived value instead of guaranteed outcomes. Targeting changes are percentage-point movements, with a separate result for smaller buyers. Keep those populations and measures distinct. The hands-on question is what evidence a seller supplies about audience, placement and measurement, instead of whether a favourable survey opinion can stand in for a campaign audit.

Glossary

Methodology and sources

Every figure on this page comes from the organisation that produced it: regulators, statistics offices, public bodies, research institutes, and companies reporting their own data or surveys. Each one links to the original report or dataset and carries its release date. Survey results keep their population and fieldwork period, and financial figures keep the measure the producer used. Figures from different producers are not added together or ranked against each other. The page is reviewed monthly and updated when a producer releases newer data.