Journal Revenue Models Compared: Subscription vs OA vs Hybrid
Reviewed by the NeucitePress Editorial Board — PhD academics, peer-reviewed journal editors and subject-matter specialists.
Last updated: October 2026 • Reviewed by the NeucitePress Editorial Board • Reading time: 7 minutes
Every journal has costs: platform, production, editorial support, archiving. The revenue model decides who pays for them, and it also decides who can read the journal, which authors can afford to publish in it, and whether funders will accept it. This guide compares the four models most journals choose between: subscription, open access with article processing charges (APCs), diamond open access and hybrid.
We have deliberately left out industry-wide percentages and price benchmarks. Fees and market shares differ by field, region and publisher, and figures quoted without a source go out of date quickly. Where a price matters, check the current price list of the publisher you are considering.
Who pays under each model
The subscription model
Libraries and individuals pay for access, and the journal restricts full text to those who have paid. The income is recurring and predictable, which makes planning easier, and authors usually pay nothing to publish.
The trade-offs are access and mandates. Restricted content limits readership, especially for institutions that cannot afford the subscription, and a subscription-only journal cannot satisfy funders that require immediate open access to the published version (see Plan S below). Libraries also review their spending regularly, so renewals are never guaranteed.
Open access with article processing charges
In this model the journal is free to read, and the costs are recovered through an APC, usually paid by the author’s funder or institution. It matches the requirements of most open access funders, and it ties income to output rather than to library budgets.
The risks are different. Authors without funding cannot pay, so a journal needs a published waiver policy that is applied consistently. Because income rises with every accepted article, a journal must also protect its editorial independence: the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice expect the journal to state its fees clearly, and editorial decisions must not depend on whether an author pays. Evidence that open access raises citations is mixed and confounded by the kinds of papers authors choose to make open, so do not set a revenue plan around a citation advantage.
Diamond open access and Subscribe to Open
Diamond open access journals charge neither readers nor authors. The costs are carried by a society, a university, a funder or a consortium. The European Diamond Open Access action plan, produced by Science Europe, cOAlition S and partners, sets out this definition and argues that it needs sustained institutional funding rather than fees.
Subscribe to Open (S2O) is a related approach for journals that already have subscribers: the journal publishes each volume open access if enough subscribers renew, so the content is open to everyone while the subscribers cover the costs. It was developed by Annual Reviews and has since been adopted by other publishers. It works best where there is an existing library base to convert.
The hybrid model
A hybrid journal keeps its subscriptions and lets authors pay an APC to make individual articles open. For a subscription journal it is the easiest way to offer open access without changing the whole business. Two concerns follow:
- Double payment. Libraries can feel they are paying twice, once through the subscription and once through the APCs their authors pay. Publishers and institutions address this through offsetting or transformative agreements that combine reading and publishing fees.
- Funder compliance. cOAlition S, the group behind Plan S, does not accept the standard hybrid route for funded authors unless the journal is covered by a transformative arrangement, and it has said such support is time-limited. Check the current position on the cOAlition S website before promising funded authors that a hybrid journal is compliant.
How the models compare
| Model | Who pays | Strength | Main risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subscription | Libraries and readers | Recurring income | Limited readership; not accepted by open access mandates |
| APC open access | Authors, funders, institutions | Free to read; fits funder policies | Unfunded authors; pressure to publish volume |
| Diamond open access | Society, university, funder or consortium | No fee for authors or readers | Depends on continued sponsor funding |
| Hybrid | Libraries plus authors | Gradual route to open access | Double-payment criticism; funder acceptance |
How to choose a model for your journal
- Count the real cost. Include platform, production, editor time, DOIs, indexing and archiving, including costs hidden in salaries.
- Look at your authors. Are they funded? Which funders do they report to, and what do those funders require?
- Look at your readers. Is the audience institutional, professional, or global and unfunded?
- Find a sponsor, if you can. A society, university or consortium commitment makes diamond access realistic.
- Write the policies first. Fees, waivers, licensing and the separation of payment from editorial decisions should be public before the first invoice.
- Review every year. Funder policies and library budgets change, so a model that works now needs a scheduled review.
Frequently asked questions
What are the main business models for academic journals?
Subscription, open access funded by article processing charges, diamond open access funded by a sponsor, and hybrid, which mixes subscription income with optional APCs.
Is an APC always required for open access?
No. Diamond open access journals charge no one, and Subscribe to Open keeps content open through subscriber renewals. APCs are one route among several.
Can a hybrid journal satisfy Plan S?
Not by default. cOAlition S accepts hybrid publishing for funded authors only where the journal is covered by a transformative arrangement it recognises, and that support has been time-limited. Check with the funder.
How should a journal handle authors who cannot pay an APC?
Publish a waiver policy with clear criteria, apply it consistently, and keep waiver and payment status away from the editors who decide on acceptance.
NeucitePress services for journal owners
Three services for choosing, running and documenting a funding model. Decisions on funding and editorial matters stay with your journal.
A true cost baseline, an options analysis covering APC, diamond, society-funded, subscription and publisher partnership, a five-year model and a written recommendation.
Licensing, deposit, rights retention and metadata configured against the funder mandates your authors face, with a public compliance statement and an annual re-check.
A public charge and waiver policy, waiver decisions against it, invoicing, payment follow-up and a monthly report, kept separate from your editors.
