PanelFollows
5.0overallPrices 90% below the market median. 40/100 trust (unproven).
Coverage is still narrow. Live prices have been read from 1 of 129 panels (2,182 services). The rest are listed because they are real, reachable operators — not because we have seen their rates. Panels with no synced catalogue show no prices rather than an estimate. How the data is gathered.
YouTube is where per-1,000 pricing breaks down hardest, so this ranking is built only on the services where a per-1,000 figure means the same thing at every panel. Watch hours and live-stream views are excluded on purpose, and the reason is worth reading before you buy either.
How this ranking is produced: Panels selling at least three of YouTube subscribers, views, likes, shorts views and comments, ranked by their prices for those five services weighted evenly with their overall score. The order is generated by that query at build time — there is no editorial override anywhere in it.
Data captured from 1 panels
Only 1 panel matches this filter, which is too few for a ranking to mean much. The page is kept out of search results until it has more behind it.
Prices 90% below the market median. 40/100 trust (unproven).
| # | Panel | Subscribersper 1,000 | Viewsper 1,000 | Likesper 1,000 | Shorts Viewsper 1,000 | Commentsper 1,000 | vs marketmedian of ratios | Trust | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PanelFollowspanelfollows.com | $0.143 | $0.064 | $0.656 | Shorts Views: not verified | $0.524 | 0.10× | 40 | 5.0 |
A dash means we have not verified that value, which is different from a zero. Price position is a median against the market, so it is not distorted by a panel listing one unusually cheap service.
Because “1,000 watch hours” is not a quantity. Panels quote watch hours per 1,000 units of order quantity, and depending on the video length a panel requires, those thousand units map to anywhere between roughly 250 and 8,000 actual hours delivered. Two panels quoting the same number can therefore be eightfold apart on the thing you are buying, and ranking them against each other would be inventing a comparison. The same applies to live-stream views, which are viewer-slots held for a session length that varies by panel. Both appear on their own service pages with the unit spelled out; neither is ranked here.
Monetisation. YouTube audits watch time and subscriber quality against the Partner Programme thresholds, and purchased engagement that is stripped after the fact can leave a channel short of a threshold it appeared to have crossed. That makes YouTube the platform where the gap between the cheapest and the most expensive service matters most: the bottom of this market is bot traffic that YouTube identifies routinely. If a channel’s monetisation depends on the numbers, the cheap end of this table is the wrong end. The second-order risk is subtler: purchased views arrive from accounts with no watch history on the channel, which drags average view duration down, and average view duration is an input to how aggressively YouTube recommends the next upload. A campaign that raises the view count and lowers the retention curve can leave a channel worse off than it started, and no panel in this market will tell you that before you order.