UK music distribution in 2026 costs anywhere from roughly £20 a year for DIY flat-fee services to 15 to 30% commission for full-service distribution and label services. This guide explains the four pricing models, what each actually includes, and how to work out which is cheapest for your catalogue.
The short answer
There are four pricing models in UK music distribution: flat annual fees (roughly £20 to £80 a year, you keep 100% of royalties), per-release fees (a one-off charge per single or album), commission deals (typically 10 to 30% of royalties, no upfront cost), and label services agreements (commission plus a defined service layer). No model is universally cheapest - a flat fee beats commission on money alone once your streaming income passes a few hundred pounds a year, but commission models bundle services that flat-fee platforms charge extra for or do not offer at all. The real comparison is cost against what is included.
Model 1: flat annual fee (DistroKid, Amuse tiers)
You pay a subscription - DistroKid starts at around £19.99 a year - and keep 100% of streaming royalties, usually with unlimited releases. This is the cheapest route for a self-sufficient artist who handles their own metadata, artwork specs, pitching and problem-solving. The trade-offs are self-service support, limited label features on base tiers, and the fact that your releases stay live only while you keep paying. Hidden extras matter too - some platforms charge add-ons for features like YouTube Content ID or store customisation that commission services include by default.
Model 2: per-release fees (classic TuneCore-style pricing)
A one-off charge per single or album, sometimes with annual renewal fees, and you keep your royalties. Per-release pricing suits artists who release rarely - one or two singles a year - where an unlimited subscription would be wasted. It becomes expensive quickly for prolific artists and labels. Several services have migrated from pure per-release pricing to subscription plans, so check the current structure of any service you are comparing rather than relying on its historical reputation.
Model 3: commission (percentage of royalties)
You pay nothing upfront; the distributor keeps a percentage of what your music earns - commonly between 10 and 30%. Code Group Music's distribution runs this way at 15% of royalties collected. The structural advantage is aligned incentives - the distributor only earns when you do, which is why commission models typically include the human service layer flat-fee platforms cannot afford to provide - metadata handled properly at delivery, editorial playlist pitching, niche and regional platform coverage, migration management and real support. The disadvantage is symmetrical - on a catalogue earning serious streaming income, the commission will exceed what a flat fee would have cost, and you should do that maths honestly.
Model 4: label services
Label services agreements bundle distribution with some combination of publishing administration, metadata administration, rights management and release strategy - functioning as a record label's operations without the record label owning your masters. Pricing is typically commission-based per service line. This model exists for catalogues where the money leaks are bigger than distribution alone - unregistered publishing, broken identifiers, uncollected international royalties - problems a £20-a-year platform has no mechanism to fix.
The crossover maths
The honest way to compare a flat fee against a commission: estimate your annual distribution royalties, multiply by the commission rate, and compare against the subscription cost. At 15% commission, a catalogue earning £150 a year costs £22.50 - about the same as DistroKid. At £1,000 a year it costs £150. On raw money, the flat fee wins once you clear a few hundred pounds annually. The commission case rests on the delta in collections - if proper metadata, complete platform coverage and pitching lift what the catalogue collects by more than the commission takes, the percentage is the cheaper option in net terms. For many independent catalogues the uncollected sums are genuinely larger than the commission; for a well-run catalogue already collecting everything, they are not. Run your own numbers with the free royalty gap estimator before deciding.
Costs that don't appear on the pricing page
Whichever model you choose, the expensive failures in distribution are rarely the headline price:
- Metadata errors that misroute royalties at PPL and the societies - the leading hidden cost of cheap distribution
- Missing niche platform coverage (Boomplay, JioSaavn, Audiomack, Beatport) for genres where those platforms carry real audiences
- Publishing royalties never collected because a distributor only handles the recording side - streaming generates songwriting royalties too, and no distribution deal collects them
- Migration damage when switching services - takedown gaps and changed ISRCs cost algorithmic momentum
- Your own time: self-service is a real cost if admin hours displace making music
Who each model is for
A practical rule of thumb:
- Flat fee: self-sufficient artists who release regularly, handle their own admin competently, and want maximum margin
- Per release: artists releasing once or twice a year with simple needs
- Commission: artists and labels who want the service layer - metadata done properly, pitching, full platform coverage - with zero upfront risk
- Label services: catalogues with money leaking across publishing, metadata and distribution simultaneously, or rights holders without time or expertise in-house
How to find out what your catalogue should cost
Code Group Music's distribution is 15% commission of royalties collected, no upfront fees, via AudioSalad infrastructure to 150+ platforms. Whether that beats a flat fee for your catalogue is exactly what the free Catalog Assessment answers - submit it at codegroupmusic.co.uk/#catalog-assessment and you get specific, honest recommendations, including when a DIY flat-fee platform is genuinely the better fit for you. No obligation either way.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the cheapest way to distribute music in the UK?
On headline price, a flat-fee service like DistroKid at roughly £20 a year with unlimited releases. Whether it is cheapest in net terms depends on what it fails to collect - metadata errors, missing platforms and uncollected publishing royalties routinely cost independent artists more than any subscription or commission.
Do free music distributors exist?
Some services offer free tiers that take a commission instead of a fee, or restrict features until you upgrade. Free tiers are a reasonable way to test a service, but check the commission rate, which platforms are excluded, and who controls your ISRCs before building a catalogue on one.
Is 15% commission a lot for distribution?
It is mid-range for commission-based distribution and label services, where 10 to 30% is typical. The relevant question is net collections - a commission service that lifts what your catalogue actually collects by more than the commission percentage is cheaper than a flat fee in real terms, and the reverse is also true.
Does distribution cost cover my publishing royalties?
No. Distribution collects recording royalties from streaming and download platforms. The songwriting side - PRS performance royalties and MCPS mechanicals - needs separate registration and collection, which is publishing administration. Streaming generates both, and artists who only have distribution routinely leave the publishing half uncollected.
Published