The evidence suggests that substantial MLM earnings are uncommon, but there is no single reliable “success rate” covering every company.
The crucial distinction is between selling products, receiving commissions and actually making a profit.
What the association’s own figures tell us
The US Direct Selling Association’s industry overview reports these figures for 2024:
| Annual retail sales | US$34.7 billion |
|---|---|
| People working to build a direct-selling business | 5.4 million |
| Average annual retail sales per seller | US$6,426 |
The association separately identifies 6.8 million “discount buyers”—people purchasing for themselves rather than building a business. That distinction matters: someone who only wanted discounted products should not automatically be counted as a failed entrepreneur.
However, US$6,426 in sales is not US$6,426 in earnings. Product costs, the compensation arrangement and business expenses determine what the seller keeps. And an industry average does not reveal what the typical participant receives.
These figures also cover direct selling broadly, not exclusively MLM arrangements.
I could not verify a public association statistic showing what percentage of Australian MLM business participants make a profit after all expenses. Consequently, association sales figures alone cannot answer your success-rate question.
Independent research gets closer to the answer
AARP Foundation’s 2018 US study surveyed 601 current or former MLM participants, alongside a separate comparison group.
Participants reported the following financial outcomes:
| Made a profit | Approximately 25% |
|---|---|
| Broke even | Approximately 27% |
| Lost money | Approximately 47% |
Rounded percentages as reported.
Put plainly, about one in four reported making any profit, while roughly three in four reported no profit or a loss.
Even among those reporting a profit, 53% said it was below US$5,000. Importantly, these were overall results for the MLM experience being described—not necessarily one year’s earnings. They were also self-reported, not audited accounts.
This does not establish a 25% success probability for someone joining an Australian MLM today. It is an older US survey, spanning different companies and participation periods. But it provides a much more relevant measure than total industry sales.
What the more recent FTC review found
In September 2024, the US Federal Trade Commission published a staff review of 70 MLM income disclosures, collected in February 2023.
Its central finding was that many participants received no payments, and the vast majority received US$1,000 or less annually—under US$84 a month on average. Most disclosures did not account for participant expenses.
The FTC also identified problems such as excluding low or zero earners, emphasising exceptional earners and presenting confusing averages. Some disclosures excluded retail resale income, so the figures were not a consistent measure of total income or net profit. The sample was not necessarily representative of every MLM.
These findings support caution. They do not justify inventing one precise worldwide failure percentage.
So.. what should “success” actually mean?
Receiving a commission is a milestone. It is not proof that the business has paid its way.
For someone joining to earn money, a useful test is:
Commissions and retail profit, minus all business expenses, over a stated period.
Then ask whether the amount left adequately rewards the hours worked. Recovering costs after hundreds of unpaid hours is different from creating a worthwhile income.
For our water ionizer discussion, this is the missing half of the picture. The commission schedule explains what a qualifying sale can pay. It does not show how often a new distributor achieves those sales or whether their overall business is profitable.
Before calling an opportunity successful, I would want answers to three questions:
- Of Australian participants who joined to build a business, what percentage recovered their business outlay within 12 and 24 months?
- What was their median net profit, including zero earners and those who left?
- What did they earn per hour after expenses?
Conclusion: MLM success stories show that some people earn money. They do not establish that substantial earnings are typical. The industry’s sales figures cannot substitute for evidence of ordinary participants’ profits—and the independent evidence gives prospective participants good reason to be cautious.
What about the Kangen commission Scheme?
Using Enagic’s published Australian figures, a K8 sale can generate A$3,200 in eight-point distributor commissions—about 47.1% of its A$6,787 retail price. That money is shared between the selling distributor and eligible distributors above them.
However, there isn’t one fixed “everyone gets this much” breakdown. It depends on the seller’s rank, the sales network and bonus eligibility.
1. The figures behind the calculation
The published Australian price is A$6,787 including GST, excluding delivery. That consists of A$6,170 plus A$617 GST.
The latest Australian commission-rate table I could verify is dated June 2024. It lists:
| Standard commission | A$290 | A$2,320 |
|---|---|---|
| Conditional Special Point bonus | A$110 | A$880 |
| Combined, where every point qualifies | A$400 | A$3,200 |
The Special Point bonus requires a qualifying direct sale within the previous three months, according to that chart. Payment methods can also affect commissions. These are published-plan calculations, not confirmation of the payout on a particular purchase.
2. How much does the person selling you the K8 receive?
Here is the standard direct-sale illustration, assuming all eight points receive the full A$400 rate:
| 1A | 1 | A$400 | A$2,800 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2A | 2 | A$800 | A$2,400 |
| 3A | 3 | A$1,200 | A$2,000 |
| 4A | 4 | A$1,600 | A$1,600 |
| 5A | 5 | A$2,000 | A$1,200 |
| 6A | 6 | A$2,400 | A$800 |
The seller’s amounts follow Enagic’s Australian rank table.
“Upline” means distributors above the seller in the sponsoring network. Their individual allocations depend on the network’s structure and the points already paid below them. Eight points does not necessarily mean eight people. Enagic’s own explanation makes that distinction.
So, if you buy through a qualifying 1A seller, that seller may receive A$400 while other eligible distributors collectively receive A$2,800—even though you may never have dealt with them.
3. What remains with Enagic?
For that fully qualifying eight-point example:
| Customer pays, excluding delivery | A$6,787 |
|---|---|
| Eight-point distributor commissions | A$3,200 |
| Balance with Enagic before GST settlement, other bonuses and business costs | A$3,587 |
That A$3,587 is not Enagic’s profit. It still has to accommodate the relevant taxes, product costs, operations, warranty obligations and any additional applicable bonuses.
There is also a tax wrinkle: Enagic’s Australian policies describe commission payments as GST-inclusive. Consequently, the A$3,200 is not necessarily the distributors’ after-GST income. Enagic’s net GST payment also depends on eligible input-tax credits. Simply subtracting A$617 from the remaining cash does not produce a reliable profit figure.
4. What this breakdown cannot tell us
The eight-point calculation is not the complete compensation system. Enagic also identifies educational allowances and higher-rank incentives. Eligibility and inactivity rules can change payments, so A$3,200 is neither a guaranteed payout nor necessarily the ceiling for all compensation associated with a sale.
The public documents reviewed do not establish the K8’s manufacturing cost or Enagic’s profit on an individual machine. Nor can they identify the actual recipients without the specific sales-network details.
The fair conclusion is straightforward: a substantial part of the K8’s price supports its distributor compensation system. That helps explain the price, but does not tell us what the machine costs to manufacture.