A framework for evaluating affiliate programs before you promote a single link.
“Just recommend products you love!”
That’s the affiliate marketing advice you’ll find everywhere. It sounds reasonable. It’s also almost useless if you’re a solo creator with a few hundred readers.
Here’s why. Most affiliate programs are built for high-traffic websites. The commission structures assume tens of thousands of monthly visitors, conversion rates that work at scale, and content machines pumping out comparison posts and product reviews. That’s not what solo creators do. And when you try to play that game anyway, you end up with a handful of clicks, a $3 commission, and a nagging feeling that you just cheapened your content for nothing.
The problem isn’t affiliate marketing. It’s picking programs designed for a completely different game.
I’ve spent time digging into how affiliate programs are actually structured – not the marketing pages, but the math behind them. What I found changed how I think about which programs are worth considering in the first place. Most aren’t. But a few are, if you know what to look for.
The math nobody talks about
Let’s make this concrete.
Say you have 1,000 monthly readers. That’s a solid audience for a solo creator – engaged, growing, built on real content. Now say 3% of them click an affiliate link in one of your articles. That’s 30 clicks. A decent conversion rate from there is maybe 2–3%. So you’re looking at roughly one sale per month from that link.
If the program pays a one-time commission of $5, you’ve earned $5. For the month. From a link you had to write around, position carefully, and defend editorially.
Scale that across a year and you’re at $60. For one program.
Now multiply that feeling across three or four programs, each requiring their own content integration, their own tracking, their own mental overhead. You’re managing a system that produces pocket change and costs you something harder to measure – attention.
This is where most solo creators land. Not because they’re doing it wrong, but because the programs they picked were never designed to work at their scale.
What actually matters
After looking at a range of affiliate structures, three criteria separate programs worth your time from the ones that aren’t. Not all three need to be perfect, but if a program fails on two of them, it’s not worth the effort.
Commission structure. This is the single biggest differentiator. One-time flat commissions – $2, $5, even $10 per sale – don’t compound. You earn once, then you need another sale. At low volume, that’s a treadmill.
Recurring revenue share works differently. A program that pays 20–30% monthly recurring commission means every conversion keeps paying. One sale in January is still generating revenue in June. Ten conversions over a year stack into something that actually resembles a revenue stream. The math changes fundamentally when commissions repeat.
For solo creators with small audiences, recurring beats one-time almost every time. The volume isn’t there to make one-time commissions meaningful. But recurring compounds patience into progress.
Product-content fit. Here’s the filter most people skip. Can you write about this product naturally – as part of content you’d create anyway?
If promoting a product requires you to write a dedicated review that doesn’t fit your editorial direction, it’s a distraction. The best affiliate content doesn’t feel like affiliate content. It’s a tool mentioned in a workflow article. A service referenced in a case study. A resource linked in a guide where it genuinely belongs.
The moment you start shaping content around affiliate links instead of the other way around, you’ve lost the thing that makes solo content work – editorial trust. Your readers chose you because your recommendations aren’t ads. Keep it that way.
Audience alignment. Does your audience already use or need this type of product? There’s a fundamental difference between recommending something your readers would naturally buy and trying to convince them they need something new.
A tool your audience already searches for converts at a completely different rate than something you have to explain from scratch. The first is a service. The second is a sales pitch. Solo creators don’t have the traffic to make sales pitches work – but they do have the trust to make genuine recommendations land.
How to apply this
Start with whatever programs you’re considering or already signed up for. Run each one through the three criteria.
Does it pay recurring commissions, or one-time? Is it something you’d mention naturally in content you’re already planning? Does your audience actually need it?
Most programs won’t pass all three. Some won’t pass any. That’s the point. You’re not trying to maximize the number of affiliate links in your content. You’re trying to find the one or two that actually fit – and then let them work quietly inside content that serves your readers first.
One well-chosen program with recurring revenue and genuine content fit will outperform five random affiliate links scattered across your site. Not in the first month. But over six months, a year – the compounding effect of recurring commissions and natural integration adds up in a way that chasing individual sales never does.
There’s a secondary benefit here too. The evaluation process itself teaches you something. When you ask “does my audience need this?” you’re forced to think clearly about who your readers are and what they’re trying to do. That’s useful regardless of whether you ever place a single affiliate link.
The real opportunity
Affiliate marketing for solo creators isn’t a revenue stream you bolt on. It’s a lens for understanding what your audience values – and occasionally getting paid for that understanding.
The opportunity isn’t in collecting programs and spreading links. It’s in choosing so carefully that the recommendation feels like content. Because for a solo creator, that’s the only version that works.
Stop chasing pennies. Pick fewer programs. Let them compound.
