Let me get this straight.

Netflix, the company that reinvented how 325 million people watch television, that cracked the code on binge culture, that turned "Netflix and Chill" into a globally recognized euphemism, has 190 million monthly active viewers sitting inside its ad-supported tier, and it can't figure out how to sell ads to them.

Not "struggling." Not "working through some kinks." Can't. Fill. The. Inventory.

One estimate pegs Netflix's ad fill rate at just 45% in 2025. Let that marinate for a second. The most valuable captive audience in the history of streaming, watching premium content in a brand-safe environment with single-digit ad minutes per hour, and more than half the available ad slots go unsold. If you ran a restaurant with 190 million reservations and only served food to 45% of the tables, you wouldn't call that "early days." You'd call it a health code violation.

And yet here we are.

Netflix wants you to focus on the big numbers, and admittedly, the big numbers are big. Ad revenue topped $1.5 billion in 2025, up 2.5x from 2024. The company forecasts 2026 revenue of $50.7 to $51.7 billion, with a projected rough doubling of ad revenue. That would put the ad business around $3 billion in a company doing north of fifty. So the ad tier is roughly six percent of total revenue, growing fast, and Netflix would very much like you to be impressed now, please.

I am not impressed.

Because the actual story isn't what Netflix made. It's what Netflix left on the table. At 100% fill, Netflix would earn between $4.80 and $9 per monthly active user in ad revenue. At 45% fill, that drops to between $4 and $8 per month per subscriber. For context, the ad-free Standard plan costs $17.99 a month. The ad tier costs $7.99. Netflix's entire bet is that the combination of the $7.99 subscription fee plus ad revenue will eventually equal or exceed what an ad-free subscriber is worth. At 45% fill? They're not even close.

Co-CEO Greg Peters acknowledged on the Q4 earnings call that "there is still a gap between the ad tier ARM and standard without ads." He called it a "narrowing" gap. I'd call it a canyon with a marketing team.

Here's where it gets uncomfortable for the "ad tier is a rocketship" narrative.

Netflix's ad-supported revenue in Q4 2025 missed analyst expectations, with growth of 79.1% falling short of the 81.5% analysts had projected. That's not a disaster. 79% growth is obviously strong in isolation. But when you've spent two years telling Wall Street that your ad business is the next great high-margin growth engine, "light of expectations" is not the phrase you want showing up in S&P Global research notes.

Deutsche Bank analysts noted that "the last couple of years were slower out of the gate than we had estimated" but expressed belief the business is "hitting its stride." Translation from sell-side analyst to English: "We've been wrong about timing twice, but we're going to be right this time. We promise."

S&P Global analysts now expect operating income growth of 21.5% in 2026, down from a pre-quarter view of 25%, with EPS forecasts revised lower by 3.7%, reflecting concerns about rising costs rather than demand. Netflix guided its 2026 operating margin at 31.5%, which came in 120 basis points below where consensus expected. The market's reaction? Netflix shares have been hammered over the past six months, and the stock sank further following Q4 earnings.

The ad tier isn't the only reason for the stock pressure (the Warner Bros. Discovery acquisition drama is sucking up plenty of oxygen) but the point stands: Netflix's ad business is not delivering at the pace the narrative requires.

So what's actually wrong? Let's start with the obvious: Netflix built a product for consumers and forgot to build one for advertisers.

If you're a brand and you want to buy Netflix inventory right now, here are your options. You can go direct through Netflix's sales team, which requires a minimum spend of $500,000 or more per campaign with CPMs between $45 and $65. That's fine if you're Procter & Gamble. It's a brick wall if you're anyone else.

Or you can go programmatic, buying through Amazon, AJA, Google Display & Video 360, The Trade Desk, or Yahoo DSP, with CPMs ranging between $20 and $30. So you've got a premium platform selling at a discount through third-party pipes, next to direct deals at double the price. That pricing spread doesn't say "premium, controlled environment." It says "we'll take whatever we can get through whichever door you walk in."

Layer on top of that the verification and measurement stack (DoubleVerify, Integral Ad Science, Innovid, Google Campaign Manager, plus Netflix's own nascent measurement tools) and you've got an ad ecosystem that is, to use a technical term, a mess. It's not that any one piece is broken. It's that the whole thing was assembled by a company that fundamentally did not understand how advertising infrastructure is supposed to work, because it spent twenty years explicitly not being an advertising company.

And that brings us to the leadership problem.

Netflix's first ad chief, Jeremi Gorman, lasted about a year before being replaced in October 2023 by Amy Reinhard, a longtime Netflix executive whose background is in content acquisition, studio operations, and M&A. Not ad sales. Not DSPs. Not ad-tech product. Not programmatic. Studio operations. Peter Naylor, the veteran ad-sales executive hired from Hulu to actually build the sales engine, departed in mid-2024. Julie DeTraglia, who led measurement partnerships, exited as part of a regionalization reshuffling. The bench keeps turning over before it has time to warm up.

Reinhard is a polished, corporate-fluent operator. Harvard BA and MBA. NCAA-honored former athlete. A decade at Paramount. She gives great keynote. She talks about "attention" and "seamless experiences" and Netflix being "uniquely valuable to advertisers" with the confidence of someone who has never had to fix a broken frequency cap at 2 AM. The buy-side skepticism writes itself: the person running one of the world's most valuable ad businesses has never actually run an ad business before. We'll dig deeper into the Reinhard question and what it means for Netflix's ad strategy in Part 2, available exclusively on Adotat+.

Let me do the math that Netflix doesn't want you to do.

New Street Research analyst Dan Salmon modeled that Netflix's fill rate would climb to around 70% in 2026 and 90% in 2027, eventually reaching 95% "peak fill" in 2030. That's the bull case. That's the "everything goes right" scenario, and it still doesn't get to peak monetization for four more years.

Netflix keeps ad loads between 4 and 5 minutes per hour, meaning the average ad-tier viewer sees 8 to 10 thirty-second ads each day, or 240 to 300 ads per month. At $20 to $30 CPMs and 190 million viewers, the total addressable ad revenue at full fill is somewhere in the range of $5 to $7 billion annually. Netflix made $1.5 billion in 2025. Even at the optimistic 70% fill target for 2026, they'd be pulling in roughly $3.5 to $4.5 billion. They're targeting $3 billion.

Which means Netflix is essentially telling you that even in 2026, they expect to significantly under-monetize their own audience.

And here's the thing that makes this genuinely maddening: premium CTV inventory with strong direct sales can hit 60% to 100% fill at any given time. Netflix isn't some mid-tier FAST channel running reruns of Storage Wars. This is the platform with Stranger Things, Squid Game, Wednesday, and live WWE. This is the platform where 60% of new sign-ups choose the ad tier, where 45% of U.S. Netflix households now watch on the ad-supported plan, up from 34% in 2024. The audience is there. The content is there. The inventory is there.

The buyers aren't. At least not in sufficient volume or at sufficient prices. Why that's happening, and how Netflix's obsession with running boring TV-style spots instead of innovating on creative is the root cause? That's the Adotat+ deep dive in Part 2. Trust me, it's worse than you think.

Netflix's answer to the fill-rate crisis is programmatic expansion, and in theory, this makes sense. Open up more demand-side platforms, let more buyers in, fill more slots. In Australia, Reinhard said Netflix wants to "lean heavily into programmatic" and sees the country as a leading market for moving away from direct brand relationships.

But programmatic is a double-edged sword for a platform that sells itself as premium. Streamers that primarily use programmatic platforms for ad sales can range between a 30% to 60% fill rate. The more Netflix leans into open programmatic to fill inventory, the more it imports the CTV/FAST industry's structural problems: ad fraud, viewability questions, lack of transparency, and most critically, the race to the bottom on CPMs that turns "premium" inventory into commodity inventory.

Netflix built its in-house Netflix Ads Suite specifically to control this. Peters said they're "continuing to build out that ad tech stack" and adding more first-party data, interactive formats, and measurement tools in 2026. That's the right move. But it's also a move that should have been made two years ago. "We're building the plane while flying it" is not a reassuring pitch to CMOs deciding where to put their upfront dollars.

How the programmatic trap connects to Netflix's AI ad gamble, and why the "modular interactive formats" rolling out in Q2 2026 might actually make things worse? That's Part 2 and Part 3 on Adotat+.

Strip away the spin and here's what you've got: Netflix is the biggest, most culturally dominant streaming platform in the world, and its ad business is performing like a startup in Year 2 of a Series B. The audience is there. The scale is there. The monetization isn't. The fill rate is an embarrassment for a platform of this caliber. The sales infrastructure is fragmented. The leadership keeps churning. And the company's response is a mix of "give us more time" and "look, AI ads are coming," which, if you're an Adotat+ subscriber, you already know is a whole other disaster.

Co-CEO Peters framed the gap between ad-tier and ad-free revenue as an "opportunity." Sure. The way a leaking roof is an "opportunity" for a roofer. The question is whether Netflix can fix it before the ceiling comes down.

The ad tier isn't failing. Let's be clear about that. $1.5 billion in year three is real money. But it's dramatically under-performing relative to the asset Netflix is sitting on, and the structural reasons (fill-rate gaps, sales fragmentation, leadership instability, the broader CTV supply glut, and an ad chief who's never run an ad business) aren't problems you solve with a press release about "modular interactive video ads."

They're problems you solve by actually becoming an advertising company. And three years in, Netflix still hasn't decided if it wants to be one.

This is Part 1 of a 3-part Adotat series on Netflix's ad-tier crisis.

Part 2: "TV Ads on a Tech Platform: Netflix's Creative Failure and the AI Gamble" goes deep on why Netflix refuses to innovate beyond basic video spots, why Amy Reinhard's background is shaping (and limiting) the entire ad strategy, the surveillance advertising machine behind the "personalization" pitch, and why the content-commerce line Netflix is about to cross should worry every creator on their platform. Available now on Adotat+.

Part 3: "The Ticking Clock: Can Netflix Close the Gap Before Wall Street Stops Believing?" connects the fill-rate crisis and creative poverty to the financial and market-structure risks, the ARPU time bomb, and what happens to the entire CTV ad market if Netflix stumbles. Available now on Adotat+.

Subscribe to Adotat+ to read the full series →