Why the Substack Algorithm Ultimately Sucks
...and what a stubborn writer can do about it
I spent a month courting Substack like a beleaguered lover: steady letters, late-night edits, the little prayers you mutter before hitting publish. Twenty posts. A thousand views. Ten subscribers. Ten tiny promises of attention in a wilderness of distractions.
Then the growth stopped. The numbers flattened like old paint. The views dried up. The one or two people who actually open my emails each week felt like saints at a church service no one else attended.
So I dug. The dirt beneath Substack’s sparkling new lawn is not fertile earth — it’s algorithmic topsoil: compact, seeded, and engineered to grow the same plants every spring.
Here’s what I learned, and why a lot of other frustrated writers are seeing the same weeds:
The Big Fish Tank — How Substack’s Search Privileges Its Own Giants
Step into Substack’s search bar and type almost anything — art, politics, love, spirituality, philosophy, climate, AI.
What you’ll see first are the big fish: the long-established newsletters with tens of thousands of subscribers, hundreds of comments, and a long trail of “restacks.”
Their names appear at the top not necessarily because their writing is better, but because their social signals — likes, comments, restacks, and paid subscriptions — have already proven to the algorithm that they are safe bets.
It’s the digital Matthew Effect — unto everyone that hath shall be given — translated into code.
Substack’s engineers have never really denied this: visibility is largely determined by engagement history. The search function and “Discover” tab lean toward newsletters that already demonstrate traction — much like Google’s SEO rankings favor pages with high domain authority and backlink volume. In both systems, authority compounds: the more you’re seen, the more you’re trusted, and the more you’re seen again.
For new or niche writers, that means you’re effectively starting on page ten of Google.
Even if your essays are sharper, more original, more human, or more soulful, they’re invisible unless someone manually searches your name or stumbles across a shared link.
You can’t out-write the algorithm any more than you can out-pray gravity.
But you can out-persist it.
The difference between Substack ranking and Google SEO is subtle but decisive:
Google rewards keyword optimization, backlinks, dwell time - Substack rewards engagement (likes, comments, restacks, paid subs)
Google can be influenced with strategy, meta-tags, and linking - mostly closed system — your “authority” lives inside Substack
Google measures user intent (search queries) - Substack reasures community interaction
Google can surface small sites if well-optimized - Substack rarely surfaces small newsletters, no matter how refined the prose
In both cases, visibility is currency, and currency compounds.
For the independent writer, this means the digital ecosystem isn’t a library — it’s a marketplace of echoes, where the loudest sellers are given the best stalls.
That’s why the “Discover” page so often feels repetitive: it’s a curated hall of mirrors reflecting what’s already popular. The writers who once needed exposure now serve as the algorithm’s pillars, holding up a cathedral of sameness built on the bones of creativity.
But here’s the paradox: the algorithm is not malicious; it’s mathematical.
It doesn’t hate you — it just doesn’t see you yet.
And so the task of the real writer begins: not to curse the tank, but to swim with intention, knowing that depth will always outlast surface noise.
The Platform Rewards Visible Engagement — and That Produces the “Rich Get Richer” Effect
Substack’s discovery and Notes systems heavily reward content that already shows engagement — likes, replies, restacks.
In plain English: the posts that already look popular are amplified so they stay popular.
Substack’s engineers and long-time users admit as much: “Notes, restacks and conversations are core visibility signals.”
Computer-science research calls this the popularity bias or rich-get-richer dynamic: small initial advantages compound into large gaps over time. Platforms that amplify engagement signals tend to concentrate attention among a few creators, making it hard for newcomers to break through.
Translation for the bedroom writer:
If you don’t already have a crowd that likes, comments, or restacks your Notes, the discovery system will not lift you to places where strangers notice you.
A Lot of Subscribers Are Effectively Ghosts — They Signed Up, But They Don’t Read
My “1000 views, 10 subs” pattern is common.
Open-and-engagement metrics vary wildly by niche, but many newsletters see a minority of subscribers actually open posts regularly.
Not every subscriber is an engaged reader; many subscribe impulsively, or their email clients block tracking (so an “unopened” might still be read).
Communities on Substack and Ghost both confirm this pattern: a large portion of subscribers are what we might call digital ghosts — they exist, but they don’t haunt your posts.
Practical result:
Your raw subscriber count is a vanity trophy.
The number that matters is engaged subscribers — people who actually open, click, reply and share.
Open Rates Vary Wildly — But Retention Matters More Than Reach
Reports from experienced newsletter writers show healthy open rates between 30–60% for niche audiences — but averages are meaningless if your own trend line is dropping.
The signal you should watch is:
👉 how many readers open and click week after week.
Chasing raw subscriber numbers is like collecting seashells — beautiful, but hollow.
The ocean of attention will wash most of them away.
Substack Notes, Restacks and Conversations Are Your Friend — If You Use Them Strategically
Substack’s Notes feature is designed to surface short-form thoughts and spark interaction.
Creators who post Notes, engage with others, and restack thoughtfully report higher growth and visibility.
How to use Notes without selling your soul:
Post micro-content: quotes, insights, questions.
Restack posts you genuinely believe in.
Reply meaningfully — a real comment outshines a hundred emojis.
End with a question or a challenge that invites conversation.
Substack may reward engagement, but authentic interaction still cuts through the noise like a clean guitar tone in a room full of distortion.
This Is Not Unique to Substack — All Recommendation Systems Favor Popularity
Across all creative platforms — YouTube, Spotify, Patreon, Instagram — algorithms amplify what’s already popular.
It’s called the Matthew Effect of Attention: to those who already have visibility, more shall be given.
So your struggle on Substack is part of a bigger picture:
a global attention economy where algorithms feed on engagement the way engines feed on fuel.
The irony? It’s all wrapped in the language of “community.”
What This Means for You (and What You Can Actually Do)
If the system rewards popularity, then the only sustainable rebellion is authenticity.
Don’t chase the algorithm.
Build human connections.
Write like you’re whispering to a single awake soul at 3 a.m.
Because one loyal reader who opens, reads, and replies is worth more to your creative life than 10,000 silent ghosts who scroll past your title and forget your name.
Here’s how to survive and thrive:
Prune your list — send a friendly re-engagement email to your silent subs. If they don’t open, let them go.
Engage with others — not as a networking trick, but as a real reader. Read them before expecting them to read you.
Focus on long-term resonance — not short-term reach.
Use Notes to talk, not to shout.
Remember: you’re building a garden, not a billboard.
✅Checklist — Focus on Quality, Not Vanity
Run re-engagement email & prune list (Improves open rate, inbox placement)
Post one Note per week with CTA (Boosts visibility & conversation)
Name-check engaged readers in posts (builds loyalty & word-of-mouth)
Restack five creators you genuinely read (Reciprocity increases discoverability)
A/B test subject lines monthly (Improves open rates and deliverability)
Publish one guest post / comment in another newsletter (Outsource discovery through community)
Track the ratio: active readers vs raw subs (Helps you identify real engagement)
Write for the reader who reads, not the reader you hope for (Keeps craft and authenticity intact)
In the End
The lawsuit of the polished platform disappears when you start building real relationships, not just subscriber milestones.
Write for the one who will open you at 3 a.m.
Write for the ten who will reply.
Write for the hearts slower than the algorithm.
Because a real relationship — built slowly, honestly, beautifully — will outlast every viral flame.
Sources & Further Reading (quick receipts)
Substack Notes + restack function and how it influences reach. (silkekristinjuelich.substack.com)
Chris Best and Substack commentary on engagement & algorithmic signals. (cb.substack.com)
Academic work on popularity biases and “rich-get-richer” dynamics in recommender systems. (ACM Digital Library)
Community discussions about email open rates, ghost subscribers and list cleaning. (Ghost Forum)
Guides on Notes strategy and growth experiments from Substack creators. (escapethecubicle.substack.com)
Practical tips on subject-line testing, open-rate improvement and re-engagement funnels. (productreleasenotes.com)