Submissions by The Numbers
Duotrope in focus
Stats as of July 16, 2025 (the % has been fairly consistent lately)
vs.
What are we looking at?
Overall submissions in all genres compared to specifically poetry submissions that are tracked through Duotrope.
*
Key Takeaways:
About 80% of submissions result in rejection.
Poetry has a slightly higher acceptance rate than other genres. This is not new. In fact, I would hazard this has been the case since “back in the day”. Some of the heritage lit mags (The New Yorker, POETRY, AGNI, NAR, Poet Lore, etc.) may have data (though probably not since this pre-dates computers) suggesting otherwise.
About 12% of poetry submissions, overall, end in acceptance.
About 9% of other genre subs end in acceptance.
*
Targeting the Right Markets
This is what I come back to again and again. You have approximately 0% chance of getting into a magazine where you work in not a good fit. You have a 90% chance of getting into a magazine where your piece is a perfect fit. Why not 100%? Because many journals put together issues, sometimes themed issues, sometimes they receive too much similar work, or they simply receive too much good work.
You have a high percentage chance of getting your work published in lit mags when you accurately determine fit or, in colloquial industry terms, “a good home” for your work.
You have almost no chance of getting your work published in lit mags where your work does not align with the subjective taste of the editors or the aesthetic of the journal or various other factors that (one hopes) the lit mag has attempted to outline in their Submission Guidelines (and/or) reveals in the work that they publish in the lit mag. Hence, the recommendation to read the guidelines and read the journal.
Note: As I write this, I’m watching a gray catbird fly from a branch to grab dangling red berries in a midair aerobatic [sic-ish] maneuver that is rather breathtaking. The catbird manages to grab the berry in its beak and fly back to a branch that can hold its weight in one fell swoop. Notably, the catbird has 100% success rate in doing so. Similarly, I’ve watched robins stick their beak in the dirt and, seemingly like magic, come up with a worm every.single.time. 100% success rate. How is this possible? Well, of course, this is by design. They’ve adapted over time to the ecosystem and this is their evolutionary mode of operation. The robin does what it does and it doesn’t do what the catbird does. They are not in competition. If the robin tries to swoop in for berries, this may be a challenge that is not worth the effort. I don’t know if catbirds know how to determine where worms are in the ground. It seems doubtful they would have the success rate of robins. Everything in nature operates in this fashion. Quick reminder, we humans are part of nature. We have areas in which we are well-suited and areas in which we are rather inhibited.
Read on for gamification.
Game Theory: From Submission to Acceptance
Bringing this back to submissions, we need to learn what works to our advantage and what are questionable uses of our time. The best uses of our time result in better success rates. If it helps you to more easily digest the blows of rejection, find a way to gamify the submission process. We can be corporate goofy about this and call it “the submission to acceptance pipeline”. In the framework of gamification, I am not a fan of the gamified concept that involves aiming to maximize for rejections. It doesn’t make sense. Aiming for 100 rejections per year means you’re working harder, not working smarter.
*
No one has time to read every lit mag… or wade through all the lit community content
This is true.
We all need help. And we can help each other.
Duotrope is just one example of a database developed to assist writers in finding where their work might find “a good home”.
Chill Subs is a terrific option to help writers navigate the state of play. The literary community is a hectic place.
We live in a time where there is a cornucopia of content. Really, too much. An overwhelming amount.
Everyone wants to offer you something, myself included.
Most of us are being well-intended with our shared content, but that doesn’t make it any less overwhelming if you’re on the receiving end of too much of a good thing. I find myself in this situation constantly.
Do the useful thing. Help others find the information that can most benefit them. This is a more positive twist on the concept of “if you see something, say something”. Beyond where to submit, if you see a grant opportunity, a fellowship, a residency, a retreat, and you think of someone who this may be the right fit for—by all means, reach out and encourage that person to apply. Sharing is caring, right? Bad gatekeeping can involve hoarding resources that would be useful to someone else.
*
I encourage you to share your thoughtful reflections in the comments.
I often do like half 'this fits the vibe' subs and half 'throw a curve ball' subs. I never bother with stats. The whole thing for me is basically a random numbers game. As a reader I like being surprised and am not always on the lookout for work that 'fits' my taste. Tastes can change, grow, evolve. Litmags aren't static entities, not are writers (hopefully). The whole game is a carnival of moving targets and shifting landscapes and every now and then you hot the bullseye, most often not. Thanks for playing. My life will not change if I get 0.5 more acceptances than last year. I'm happy if a poem finds a journal that is happy to publish it. It's a nice feeling, but best savored IMHO without too much analysis or obsession. This feels too much like online dating at times. We're at the brutal mercy of metrics, the exact opposite of art.
Thanks Mark for starting this thoughtful conversation. Like collecting art, I write about what moves me and to express myself, follow submission calls on Instagram and Duotrobe and keep track of journals I submit what to in order to refine my sense of fit between me as a writer and prospective editors (hopefully starting a relationship) and tend not to deal with those with extra long response windows or emails that show no consideration for the writers submitting to them. In other words all rejection letters are not equal either.