Updated: September 3, 2026
YouTube's view audit system is one of the most rigorous in the industry. The platform cross-references view counts against watch-time data, playback location, device types, and account activity histories to identify views that don't match organic viewership patterns — and removes them. For creators who purchase YouTube views, view audit survival rate is the defining quality metric: what percentage of purchased views are still counted after YouTube has run its enforcement passes. Views that get removed not only disappear from the count — they can trigger an anomaly signal that deprioritises the video in search results and recommendations.
We purchased view packages from seven providers, monitored view counts through YouTube's recurring audit cycles over 60 days, and ranked each service by the percentage of views that survived to the end of the monitoring period.
7 Best Sites to Buy YouTube Views in 2026
| Provider | Starter Price | Delivery | 60-Day Audit Survival | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Promotid | $3.49 / 1,000 | gradual 48–72 h | 93% | 9.7/10 |
| Twicsy | $2.99 / 1,000 | 2–4 days | 88% | 9.1/10 |
| Famoid | $3.99 / 1,000 | 48–96 h | 85% | 8.5/10 |
| UseViral | $4.99 / 1,000 | 3–7 days | 80% | 7.9/10 |
| GetAFollower | $2.49 / 1,000 | 2–5 days | 71% | 7.1/10 |
| Viralyft | $1.99 / 1,000 | instant–24 h | 59% | 6.0/10 |
| Social Viral | $2.29 / 1,000 | 1–3 days | 51% | 5.3/10 |
Promotid
Promotid's 93% view audit survival rate was the best recorded across all seven providers in our test. Views are sourced from accounts with authentic YouTube interaction histories and delivered gradually over 48–72 hours — a pacing that closely mimics the organic discovery pattern of a video gaining real traction. YouTube's audit systems processed Promotid views in all three test videos and removed fewer than 7% across the 60-day window. The views that survived also carried meaningful watch-time data, which contributed positively to video ranking signals in YouTube's recommendation engine. For creators prioritising long-term video standing and monetisation health, Promotid delivers the most durable results in this category.
Twicsy
Twicsy achieved 88% survival — the second-best result and a strong performance across our test videos. Delivery in two to four days is gradual enough to avoid triggering YouTube's anomaly detection for velocity, and the source accounts provide watch-time data that contributes to video quality signals. The 12% attrition over 60 days was evenly distributed across both audit cycles rather than concentrated in one event, suggesting consistent source quality rather than batch-specific vulnerability. Twicsy's YouTube views product is among the more reliable in its price tier.
Famoid
Famoid recorded 85% survival across its conservative 48–96 hour delivery window. The slower pace protects against YouTube's velocity flags, and the source account quality is consistent enough to produce good audit outcomes. Famoid's watch-time-per-view metric was the third-best in our test — views from Famoid accounts tend to include meaningful play duration, contributing to a video's average view duration metric in YouTube Analytics. For creators where average view duration affects monetisation rates or recommendation placement, Famoid's quality profile is worth the slightly higher price.
UseViral
UseViral's 80% survival rate places it solidly in the upper-middle tier. The three-to-seven day delivery window is the most conservative in this group, which should theoretically produce higher survival rates — the gap relative to faster competitors reflects some source account quality variation rather than velocity-triggered removals. Customer support is a UseViral strength, and for buyers managing larger multi-platform campaigns, the single-vendor experience has practical value. A dependable option with a well-above-average survival rate.
GetAFollower
GetAFollower's 71% survival reflects a provider that delivers genuine views from mostly acceptable accounts but shows higher variability in source quality than the top tier. The 29% removed over 60 days was concentrated in the first audit cycle — views that survived 30 days tended to hold through 60 days as well. For budget-conscious creators who need a view count boost and can factor in the expected settled count being approximately 70% of purchased quantity, GetAFollower represents good value for money in its tier.
Viralyft
Viralyft's 59% survival rate reflects faster delivery with broader source account quality variation. Nearly 41% of purchased views were removed across the 60-day monitoring window — predominantly in the first audit cycle at the 30-day mark. The high initial view count does create a short-term social proof signal and can trigger YouTube's initial content promotion for new uploads before audits run. For use cases where the first 48–72 hours of a video's distribution are the critical window, Viralyft's speed-price combination has a specific application. For enduring view counts, look higher.
Social Viral
Social Viral's 51% survival rate is the lowest in this comparison — just over half of purchased views remained at the 60-day mark. Both audit cycles produced significant removal events, and in two of our three test videos, view counts were visibly fluctuating week over week, which creates a poor impression on channel visitors who notice the movement. The price is the lowest in this group, but the effective cost per surviving view — factoring in 49% attrition — makes it one of the less cost-efficient choices when final retained view count is the denominator. Most creators will find the quality-price trade-off better served by providers higher in this ranking.
How We Measured Audit Survival
We uploaded three videos across seven isolated YouTube channels, purchased 5,000 views from each provider at the same time, and tracked view counts at 24 hours, 30 days, and 60 days post-delivery. Audit survival percentage is the proportion of views present at day 60 relative to the count on the day after delivery completed. YouTube's view quality enforcement methodology is discussed in Hootsuite's YouTube algorithm guide and Buffer's YouTube Analytics guide.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does YouTube audit purchased views?
Yes. YouTube runs periodic view quality audits that assess the authenticity of view sources, and views identified as non-genuine are removed from video counts. These audits occur at irregular intervals, typically with a significant cycle in the first 30 days after a video is published. High-quality providers source views from accounts that pass YouTube's authenticity criteria, resulting in survival rates above 85%. Low-quality providers using bot accounts or recycled view sources see removal rates of 40–50%.
Will buying YouTube views affect monetisation?
YouTube's monetisation systems track authentic views — those generating actual watch time and ad impressions — rather than total view count alone. Purchased views from low-quality sources may inflate the view count without producing the watch-time metrics that drive AdSense revenue. High-quality views with meaningful watch-time data contribute more to both the view count and the underlying monetisation metrics. Always choose providers that deliver high-watch-time views rather than zero-second plays.
How quickly should I order views after uploading a video?
The first 48–72 hours after publishing are when YouTube's algorithm is most actively evaluating a video's quality signals to determine recommendation reach. Ordering views within the first 24 hours — with gradual delivery timed to coincide with this window — produces the most meaningful algorithmic benefit. Ordering views on videos that are weeks or months old can still add social proof but has limited impact on algorithmic distribution for that specific video.