Put your best link first. On the 1,237 Raydar bio pages we measured, the first button took between 62% and 82% of the clicks we could match to a button. The third button or anything below it took 3 of 4,536. Part of that is short pages: we did not count buttons per page, and a page with one button gives it every click.
That figure is a range because we calculated every number twice: once on the full sample of 12,735 views and 4,668 clicks (15 October 2025 to 27 September 2026, bots filtered out), and once without the three biggest accounts, which brought in most of the traffic. Where a number held up both ways we give it to you. Where it moved, we give the range or the direction and say so.
The numbers at a glance
| Figure | Full sample | Without the top three accounts | How to quote it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matched clicks on the first button | 81.97% | 62.05% | Range: 62-82% |
| Visits with a click, returning visitors | 43.11% | 40.83% | Quote both values |
| Visits with a click, first-time visitors | 34.62% | 17.13% | Direction only |
| Visits with a click, in-app browser | 44.89% | 30.85% | Direction only |
| Visits with a click, standard browser | 18.21% | 9.53% | Direction only |
| Views from a phone | 81.59% | 71.48% | Quote both values |
| Views from returning visitors | 16.34% | 13.56% | Quote both values |
| Views on a weekday | 75.71% | 72.51% | Quote both values |
| Visited pages with zero clicks | 65.96% | 78.23% | Range: 66-78% of pages |
1. The first button takes most of the clicks
We could match 4,536 of the 4,668 clicks to a specific button. Of those, 62-82% went to the first button on the page, depending on whether the three largest accounts are included (3,718 of the 4,536 on the full sample). The exact share moves with the sample, so we give the range; the direction is robust, and the first button took the clear majority both ways. The third button or anything below it took 3 of 4,536 clicks (0.07%), and 0.33% without the top three.
What it means. On the pages we measured, position worked as priority. One caveat we can't remove: we did not count how many buttons each page carries, so pages with only one or two buttons push this number up.
What to do. Put the link that pays you (the booking or the shop) first. When the offer changes, move the new one to the top instead of adding it further down.
| Button position | Full sample (n=4,536) | Without top 3 accounts |
|---|---|---|
| 1st button | 81.97% | 62.05% |
| 2nd button | 17.97% | 37.62% |
| 3rd or lower | 0.07% | 0.33% |
Report this as a 62-82% range for the first button, not as 82% alone.
2. People who come back click more often than first-time visitors
A session here means one visit, and we classed each visit by whether the visitor had been to that page before when they arrived. Returning visits included a click 43.11% of the time (582 of 1,350) on the full sample, and 40.83% (187 of 458) without the three largest accounts. First-time visits included a click 34.62% of the time (3,467 of 10,013), falling to 17.13% (548 of 3,200) without the top three. The returning rate held between the two calculations. The first-time rate did not, so the size of the gap depends on the sample.
How we checked it. Our first count put some visits in both groups. The main cause: a visitor who taps a link and then comes back to the page is flagged as returning on the way back. 420 visits carried both flags, and 350 of them included a click, so counting those as returning would have flattered returning visitors. That is why we class each visit by its status on arrival. We also ran the two other ways of drawing the line (returning if any view in the visit was, and returning only if every view was). Returning visitors came out ahead all three ways, in both samples.
What it means. A return visit is a stronger sign of intent than a first one.
What to do. Keep one page address across every post and profile so people who come back land somewhere familiar, and keep the thing they came back for in the top button.
| Visitor type | Full sample | Without top 3 accounts |
|---|---|---|
| Returning | 43.11% (n=1,350) | 40.83% (n=458) |
| First-time | 34.62% (n=10,013) | 17.13% (n=3,200) |
Returning visitors were ahead of first-time visitors under all three ways of classing a visit.
3. Returning visitors are a small share of the traffic
2,081 of 12,736 views (16.34%) came from a visitor who had been to that page before. Leave out the top three accounts and it was 13.56%.
What it means. Put this next to finding 2: the group most likely to click is the smallest group on the page.
What to do. When you point people to your link in a post, tell them what is new on it.
4. Visitors in an in-app browser clicked more often on the bio page
We classed each visit once, by the browser it opened in, and no visit switched between the two. 3,331 of 7,421 visits that opened in an in-app browser (44.89%) included a click. For standard browsers it was 718 of 3,942 (18.21%). Without the three largest accounts: 30.85% against 9.53%. The size of the gap changed between calculations; which side was ahead did not.
What it means. The common worry is that in-app browsers, like the one Instagram opens when someone taps your link, lose clicks. On the bio page itself, across the pages we measured, they didn't. What we cannot see is what happened after the tap: whether the destination loaded, whether a login held, whether a payment went through. The standard-browser group also includes desktop visitors, so treat this as a direction, not a clean app-versus-browser test.
What to do. Open your bio link from inside Instagram and tap through to each destination. If a login, a booking widget or a payment step breaks there, that is where the clicks you earned are going. If a destination loads but your campaign tags never reach its analytics, paste the link into the link decoder to see what it actually carries.
| Browser type | Full sample | Without top 3 accounts |
|---|---|---|
| In-app browser | 44.89% (n=7,421) | 30.85% (n=1,812) |
| Standard browser | 18.21% (n=3,942) | 9.53% (n=1,846) |
Audit recompute: each visit is classed once, by its first view's user agent.
5. Mobile brings the large majority of views
10,391 of 12,735 views (81.59%) came from a phone. Without the three largest accounts, 71.48%. Desktop was second in both calculations, but its share moved too much between them to quote as one number, and tablets barely registered.
What it means. Most people meet your bio page, and everything it links to, on a small screen.
What to do. Before you publish the link, open the page and every destination on your own phone, and go as far as the checkout or booking form.
| Device | Full sample (n=12,735) | Without top 3 accounts (n=4,439) |
|---|---|---|
| Mobile | 81.59% | 71.48% |
| Desktop | second in both | second in both |
| Tablet | near zero | near zero |
Desktop was second in both samples, but its share, and the tablet share, moved too much between samples to quote as a single number.
6. Most visited pages recorded no clicks at all
626 of the 949 pages with at least one view (65.96%) recorded zero clicks in the window. With the three largest accounts removed, the share rose to 78.23%, so read it as somewhere between 66% and 78% of pages.
What it means. This counts pages, not traffic. A page with one view counts the same as a page with hundreds, and a few accounts in the sample made many pages, so it says "most pages", not "most visitors". It also shows why a view count alone tells you little: people arrived, and nothing says the page sent them anywhere.
What to do. Judge your page on clicks, not views; our guide to link in bio analytics covers what each number means. If your page shows views and no clicks, start with the first button, for the reason in finding 1. If your current tool only shows a raw view count, our roundup of the best free link trackers covers which ones actually break clicks down.
7. Weekends don't pull extra traffic
9,644 of 12,735 views (75.71%) landed Monday to Friday, and 72.51% on the sample without the top three.
What it means. Five of the seven days are weekdays, so an even spread would already put most views there. Weekends did not take a bigger share than their two days would suggest. We also looked for a best hour and didn't find one: the two calculations disagreed on the busiest hour, and no hour stood far above the rest. Days are counted in UTC, not the visitor's local time.
What to do. Don't hold a launch or a new link back for the weekend. Use your own page's timing data over any general best-time chart, this one included.
How we measured this
Source. Raydar's own page-view and click records, read with read-only queries on 27 September 2026.
The cleaned sample. 1,237 pages from 51 account owners, carrying 12,735 views and 4,668 clicks, dated 15 October 2025 to 27 September 2026.
What we removed first. Raydar's internal, showcase and QA accounts; the founder's own test account; pages named as tests, demos or QA checks; and deleted pages.
Bot filtering. Views and clicks flagged as bots, or as coming from data-centre networks, were removed. Rows with no flag were kept, so some unflagged automated traffic may remain.
The concentration check. A few accounts hold a large share of the traffic. Removing the three largest by views leaves 816 pages, 48 owners, 4,439 views and 1,024 clicks. Every figure was calculated on both samples. Figures that held up are quoted with both values. Figures that moved a lot are quoted as a range or a direction, or left out.
Definitions. A session is one visit, and it counts as clicked if at least one click shares its session. Returning-visitor status comes from the view record; each visit takes the status of its first view. Browser type comes from the first view's user agent. Button position comes from the order buttons are saved in on the page. Views and clicks with no session ID (633 views and 34 clicks when we audited the counts) fall outside every per-visit figure.
A live dataset. Records kept arriving while we worked, so a few totals differ slightly between queries: 12,735 views in most counts and 12,736 in the returning-visitor share; 11,361 visits in the overall visit count and 11,363 in the new-versus-returning and browser splits, which we reran during an audit of the first draft.
What we left out, and why.
- One overall clicks-per-view figure. Clicks divided by views came to 36.66% (4,668 of 12,735) on the full sample and 23.07% without the three largest accounts. It is not a click-through rate, because one visitor can click several times, and it moved too much with the sample to quote as one number.
- Time to click. The median moved too much between the two calculations to publish.
- Which sites people clicked through to. Destination categories were dominated by one or two accounts, so a breakdown would describe those accounts, not bio pages in general.
- Most platform and country shares. Threads traffic, for one, came almost entirely from one account's audience. The United States was the top country in both calculations (4,572 of 12,735 views, 35.90%, on the full sample; 50.50% without the top three); the rest of the country ranking reflected individual accounts.
What we could not measure.
- Anything after the click: whether the destination loaded, a sale, a sign-up or a booking.
- Traffic source for most visits. Only 1,208 of 12,735 views (9.5%) carried a referrer channel, and that subset probably leans toward visits that pass one on. On your own links, UTM tags close most of that gap; the UTM builder writes them for you.
- How many buttons each page carries.
- Visitors' local time.
- What kind of creator or business owns each page. We did not classify owners.
Cite this report
Raydar, "Link in bio click statistics: where 4,668 clicks went, every number checked twice", raydar.bio/blog/link-in-bio-click-statistics. Sample: 1,237 pages, 51 owners, 12,735 views and 4,668 clicks, 15 October 2025 to 27 September 2026, bot-filtered.
Frequently asked questions
Which link in bio button gets the most clicks?
The first one. It took 62-82% of matched clicks (3,718 of 4,536 on the full sample, and the low end of that range with the three largest accounts removed). The exact share moves with the sample; the direction is robust. The third button or lower took 3 of the 4,536. We did not count buttons per page, so pages with only one or two buttons raise the first-button share.
Do returning visitors click more on a link in bio page?
Yes, in every way we measured it. Classed by their status on arrival, returning visitors included a click on 43.11% of their visits (582 of 1,350) on the full sample and 40.83% (187 of 458) without the three largest accounts. First-time visitors: 34.62% and 17.13%. Returning visitors stayed ahead under three different ways of classing a visit, in both samples.
What is a good link in bio click-through rate?
There is no single honest benchmark. The closest figure we have is the share of visits that included at least one click: 4,047 of 11,361 (35.63%) on the full sample, and 733 of 3,656 (20.05%) without the three largest accounts. That number swings with which accounts are in the sample, so it is not stable enough to use as a target. The steadier signals are the first-button share and the returning-visitor rate above.
Do Instagram in-app browsers lose clicks?
Not on the bio page itself, in our sample. Visits that opened in an in-app browser included a click 44.89% of the time (3,331 of 7,421), against 18.21% for standard browsers (718 of 3,942). Without the three largest accounts it was 30.85% against 9.53%. We could not measure whether destinations loaded after the tap, which is where in-app problems would show up.
How much link in bio traffic is mobile?
On the Raydar pages we measured, 10,391 of 12,735 views (81.59%) came from a phone. With the three largest accounts removed, 71.48%. Desktop was second in both calculations and tablets were close to zero.
What day do people visit link in bio pages?
9,644 of 12,735 views (75.71%) landed on a weekday, and 72.51% without the three largest accounts. That is only slightly above what an even spread across the week would give, so weekends did not draw extra traffic. We found no reliable best hour of the day.
Do visitors from social media click more than direct visitors?
In a small subset, yes. Only 1,208 of 12,735 views (9.5%) carried a referrer channel. Within it, 311 of 551 sessions from social (56.44%) and 197 of 378 from referral links (52.12%) included a click, against 36 of 195 direct sessions (18.46%). These rates held when the three largest accounts were removed, but the subset may not represent the rest.