YouTube’s New 90-Day Monetization Rule Will Push Animators Away From Shorts

YouTube’s upcoming changes to its channel monetization Partner Program may be more damaging to established Shorts creators than first thought.

As we previously reported, beginning February 1, 2027, new channels applying for full monetization will need 20 million qualified Shorts views over 90 days, double the current requirement of 10 million. Existing YouTube Partner Program members will not have to meet that higher entry threshold.

However, Shorts creators will need to maintain 10 million qualified views across a rolling 90-day period to continue receiving revenue from Shorts Feed ads and YouTube Premium. Falling below that figure will not remove a creator from YPP or affect revenue from long-form videos, but it will pause those Shorts revenue streams until the channel qualifies again.

The distinction is especially key for independent animators, whose production schedules make it especially difficult to consistently produce enough videos to maintain that level of traffic.

“The raised requirements to get into YPP aren’t the main issue,” Jeff Bruno, the animator behind the YouTube channel Glorp the Comedy Monster, told Cartoon Brew. “Prior to these changes, once you got in the YouTube Partner Program, you were in, and you stayed in the ad-sharing program no matter how many views you got. Even if you only got one million views in 90 days, you’d get paid for it.”

Under the new rules, a channel can remain a monetized YPP member in good standing while receiving no revenue from its Shorts. A creator who reaches 9.9 million qualified views during the rolling period, for example, would earn nothing from the Shorts Creator Pool that window.

“For most Shorts creators, that’s an insane requirement to keep hitting consistently every 90 days,” Bruno said, adding that many Shorts-focused YouTubers are now discussing abandoning the format in favor of long-form videos.

Importantly, the threshold is based on qualified Shorts views, which are not necessarily the same as the public view count displayed beneath a video. YouTube excludes views it considers ineligible, so a channel may need more than 10 million displayed views to reach the threshold.

The sums at stake can be significant for individuals and smaller teams. In a Reddit discussion about the changes, a creator posting under the name Shaine_Memes said nine million qualified views generated approximately $2,600 for their channel. Despite publishing three Shorts and one long-form video each week and ranking among the two most-viewed channels in their niche, the creator said their best 90-day period only narrowly reached 10 million qualified views.

“One bad algorithm month will knock me out of basically a grand every month,” the creator wrote. “Not only that, it will take a full 90 days to recover from one of those bad months.”

The rolling requirement also leaves creators vulnerable to headwinds beyond their control. A weak month, a production delay, or simply taking time away from uploading could push a channel below the requirements for payment, even if it remains active and has no policy violations.

Meanwhile, channels built around heavily automated videos can produce new material at a pace human animators cannot match. Although YouTube says repetitive or mass-produced content is ineligible for monetization, AI-generated videos can earn revenue when they comply with the platform’s policies. That said, the new requirements may favor creators who can generate large quantities of content quickly over artists who need substantial time and money to produce each short.

The changes arrive, almost ironically, as YouTube has been publicly celebrating the growth of independent animation on its platform. In April, the company’s “Animation’s New Wave” report said 61% of viewers ages 14-24 enjoy watching animated series made for YouTube as much as or more than shows produced by major studios.

But a recent ioxTV essay highlights the growing disconnect between YouTube’s enthusiasm for that success and the conditions facing the people who created it. The article, corroborated by our own reporting, points to erroneous copyright claims, poorly explained demonetizations, false accusations of AI use, automated “made for kids” designations, unclear and misleading recommendation systems, and competition from cheaply produced AI content as persistent threats to independent animation channels.

Many creators have already responded by pursuing revenue streams outside the YouTube ecosystem, including Patreon campaigns, merchandise, live events, and direct crowdfunding. The new recurring Shorts threshold gives them yet another reason to treat the platform’s ad-sharing system as an unreliable income source.