More Good TikTok UGC Creators Beat a Small Pool of “Top Performers”

One lesson from scaling TikTok UGC for our B2C SaaS

A small group of creators can produce your first winning videos. But keeping the same pool for too long creates diminishing returns.

We used to put more weight on the creators who had performed best for us in the past. Their content was still good, but the incremental impact declined over time. The format became familiar, their audience overlap increased, and even strong creators stopped feeling new.

What worked better was expanding the number of good creators across different locations, accents, styles, and micro-audiences.

Individually, many of these newer creators generated lower view counts than our historic top performers.

Collectively, they created more reach, more fresh creative angles, more comment activity, and more branded search demand.

My current takeaway:

• Keep your proven creators, but don’t let them become the whole channel.

• Treat creator freshness as a distribution variable.

• Optimise for the number of good creators and creative diversity, not only for the highest-view creator.

• Broader coverage can outperform one “star” creator whose results flatten over time.

For TikTok UGC, the asset is not just a creator. It is the constant supply of new faces, different delivery styles, and new audience pockets.

Curious whether others running creator programs have seen the same: does creator performance decay mainly because of audience fatigue, creative repetition, or simply the platform changing?