Our smallest creator outsold our biggest one
We matched a founder with two creators around the same time. One had over 41K followers. The other barely had 1K.
Everyone on the team assumed the bigger one would carry the results. More reach, more eyes, simple math.
It didn't happen that way. The creator with 1K followers brought in more actual signups, and more of them stuck around a week later. The big one got likes and a few comments, but barely any clicks past the bio link.
When we looked closer, the smaller creator's audience was just tighter. Same niche, same problems, people who trusted what she recommended because she didn't post sponsored stuff every other day. That's the kind of fit we try to prioritize on Aproov now, not the follower count first.
Has this happened to you too, the smaller name outperforming the bigger one? what would you like to have on apron (already implemented live tracking results, that's why we saw this pattern)
It serves as a good reminder that followers count doesn’t always matter much influencer. ~
When the audience trusts the creator and cares about the problem, a smaller audience is more beneficial for the creator than a viral audience.
The fact that people are still around a week later is arguably the strongest indicator here. By clicking a button once. To get someone back is a whole new level of interest.
It’s easy to default to bigger numbers, but this is a good example of why the quality of the audience matters more than its size.
exactly, morphoices. thanks for your comment!
The real lesson is sharper than "small beat big," and the wrong version will mislead your matching. It wasn't fewer followers, it was three things that coincided at 1K: tight niche match, high trust (sparse sponsorship, so a rec still means something), and an audience not sold to death. The causal variable is trust density, not size.
That matters because "prioritize smaller creators" just swaps one lazy proxy (reach) for another (smallness). A 1K account posting sponsored junk daily converts worse than a devoted 40K niche.
So build into Aproov not a size filter but a trust signal: sponsored-post frequency, comment-to-like ratio, how often recs get acted on. Measure what predicted results, not what came with it.
What did her engagement look like, real conversations or just volume?
good insight, hive mind, thanks! to answer your question: real conversation
Just checked out Aproov and I think the idea is interesting. The biggest challenge for early-stage startups is often not building the product, but getting it in front of the right people. Matching founders with creators who already have a trusted audience could make distribution much more accessible.
I also like that the deal structure isn't limited to one payment model—access, pay-per-click, or cash gives both startups and creators flexibility.
One thing I'd be curious to see is how Aproov handles creator quality and audience relevance. A good matching and performance-tracking system could be a major differentiator here.
Overall, it feels like a promising approach to solving the “how do I get my first users?” problem. 🚀
thanks a lot noob! and to answer your question: a good matching is our core product (audience, type of deal, content, and much more is taking into account). We also have a performance-traking system so the founder can see the value delivered from the creator
This perfectly illustrates the power of micro-influencers. Follower count is just a vanity metric; trust, niche alignment and audience engagement are what actually drive meaningful conversions. It makes total sense to prioritize fit over reach. Great share!
exactly!. thanks, Peter!
here to answer anything