You don’t have to sell your entire catalog to access its value. A partial catalog sale lets you sell a percentage of future royalties, specific songs, a time-limited income stream, or a defined income type — while retaining ownership of everything else. This structure is one of the fastest-growing segments of the music rights market.
→ Get a free catalog valuation — before deciding what to sell and what to keep, understand what your full catalog is worth.
Why Partial Sales Are Gaining Momentum
For most of music copyright history, selling a catalog meant an all-or-nothing decision: transfer 100% ownership in exchange for a lump sum. That binary choice left many artists on the sidelines. They needed liquidity but weren’t willing to permanently surrender everything they’d built.
The institutional capital that flooded the music rights market between 2020 and 2025 changed the calculus. Sophisticated buyers — catalog funds, royalty-focused investment vehicles, private equity — needed deal volume and deal flow. That meant being flexible on deal structure to win transactions that wouldn’t otherwise happen.
The result: a growing menu of partial sale structures that allow artists to trade some future income for immediate capital, on terms they can actually live with.
The global music copyright market was valued at $41.5 billion as of the most recent reporting, representing a 14.5% increase from 2022. Over 100 institutional buyers now compete for catalog rights, compared to roughly 10 two decades ago. That competition creates negotiating leverage for sellers — including leverage to push for partial rather than full-sale structures.
The Four Main Partial Sale Structures
Structure 1: Sell a Percentage of All Songs
The most straightforward partial sale: you transfer a defined percentage — say 25% or 50% — of all future royalties from your entire catalog to a buyer. You retain the other 75% or 50%.
How it works in practice: Your PRO and the Mechanical Licensing Collective split royalty payments according to the registered ownership split. If you sell 50% of publishing to a buyer and register that ownership with ASCAP, ASCAP distributes 50% of your publisher’s share to the buyer and 50% to you. The split is mechanical and automatic once registered.
Who buys these deals: Institutional catalog funds that want long-duration income streams. They prefer clean, established catalogs with diversified income — performance, mechanical, sync, international.
Example scenario: An artist with a catalog generating $30,000 NPS per year sells 50% of all publishing royalties. At a 15x market multiple, the full catalog is worth approximately $450,000. A 50% interest is worth approximately $225,000 in a straightforward pro-rata transaction — though in practice, buyers typically offer a slight discount (5-15%) on partial interests because they receive less income for the same administrative complexity.
Royalty Exchange facilitates percentage-of-catalog sales as part of its standard marketplace offering. Their auction format means multiple investors compete for your partial interest, potentially driving the price closer to full-value pro-rata terms.
Pros of percentage sales:
- Simple structure; easy to register and administer
- You retain proportional upside on all future value growth
- Buyer handles some administrative complexity (catalog monitoring, audit rights)
Cons:
- Every song’s future licensing decisions potentially involves the buyer’s approval rights (depending on contract)
- You receive less than 100% of any future sync deal or licensing fee
- Valuation per dollar of royalties is slightly lower than a full sale
Structure 2: Sell Specific Songs (Cherry-Picking)
Rather than selling across your entire catalog, you identify specific songs to sell while retaining all others. This works in both directions:
Selling your best songs: Highest-value tracks command the best prices. If your top three songs generate 80% of your income, you might sell just those three and retain the 20% income tail as long-term upside.
Selling your weakest songs: Conversely, if you have catalog depth but want to raise capital from songs that are declining while keeping your growing tracks, you sell the declining assets and retain the growth assets.
SongVest explicitly supports this song-by-song approach, allowing artists to list individual songs or groups of songs for sale without committing to the full catalog. Their no-seller-fee structure makes single-song sales economically viable even for smaller transactions.
Who buys these deals: Buyers with specific genre, era, or type preferences. A sync-focused buyer might specifically want your four most sync-placed songs. A catalog fund with a Beatles-era pop collection might pay a premium for your 1960s-influenced compositions.
Example scenario: A catalog has 40 songs generating $40,000 NPS annually. The top 5 songs generate $28,000 of that income. Selling those 5 songs at 16x their individual NPS yields approximately $448,000 — while retaining the 35 remaining songs that still generate $12,000 per year. The artist gets substantial liquidity while keeping 87.5% of their song count and maintaining full control of the catalog’s future.
Pros of song-level sales:
- Surgical precision — sell what you want to sell, keep what you want to keep
- No permanent impact on retained songs
- Allows you to maintain creative control and licensing approval over your most important work
Cons:
- More complex due diligence per transaction
- Buyers may offer lower per-song multiples for individual tracks vs. portfolio purchases (diversification premium lost)
- Administrative complexity increases if different buyers own different portions of your catalog
Structure 3: Time-Limited Rights (Term Deals)
Instead of transferring rights permanently, you sell the right to receive royalties for a defined period — say 10, 15, or 25 years — after which all rights revert to you fully.
This structure is rarer for pure catalog sales but exists in the form of:
Long-term licensing deals: You license your catalog to a publisher or fund for a fixed term, receiving an advance against projected royalties. At the end of the term, rights revert.
Revenue participation deals: The buyer receives a fixed share of income for a set number of years, or until they’ve received a multiple of their investment (say, 1.5x or 2x), whichever comes first. After that threshold, income reverts to you entirely.
Example scenario: A buyer pays $180,000 for the right to receive 100% of royalties from a specific song until they’ve collected $270,000 (a 1.5x return). Based on current royalty rates, this might take 8-12 years. After that, the artist receives full income permanently. The artist gets a significant lump sum now; the buyer gets a defined return; neither party has surrendered permanent ownership.
Pros of time-limited deals:
- Preserves permanent ownership entirely
- Long-term upside (especially if catalog value grows) returns to you
- Can be structured to align with specific financial needs (fund a project, cover a period of reduced income)
Cons:
- More complex legal documentation
- Buyers typically require higher effective returns to compensate for reversion risk
- Harder to find willing buyers (most catalog funds prefer permanent ownership)
Structure 4: Sell Specific Income Streams Only
Your catalog generates multiple types of royalties from multiple sources. Rather than selling everything, you sell only specific revenue streams:
Performance royalties only: You sell the right to receive PRO performance royalties (radio play, public performance, streaming) while retaining mechanical royalties, sync fees, and master income.
Mechanical royalties only: You sell streaming mechanical income while retaining everything else. The MLC’s clear reporting makes this administratively feasible.
Sync licensing rights only: You transfer the right to license your songs for synchronization to a buyer (often a sync agency or music library) in exchange for a lump sum or advance. They generate sync deals; you share in the fees.
Territorial rights: You sell rights in specific countries or territories (say, the U.S. and Canada) while retaining rights in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere.
Who buys these deals: Specialized buyers who focus on specific income streams. Sync agencies, music library companies, and some regional publishers all operate this way.
Pros of income-stream deals:
- Maximum flexibility; keep what you value most
- Can target the income stream most attractive to buyers for highest price
- Separates income that’s declining from income that’s growing
Cons:
- Complex to structure, register, and administer
- Requires precise legal documentation to define what’s sold and what’s retained
- Buyers for specific streams may be fewer and less competitive
Platforms That Support Partial Sales
Royalty Exchange
Royalty Exchange is the largest U.S. marketplace for royalty income and has facilitated over $200 million in transactions for rightsholders. Their platform is specifically designed for partial sales and fractional interests:
- You can list a percentage of royalties from your catalog
- 30,000+ investors bid in auction format
- Competitive bidding can push prices toward full-value pro-rata terms
- Transparent, documented process with escrow
Royalty Exchange’s flexible structure means they can accommodate percentage-of-catalog sales, song-specific sales, and some revenue-participation structures.
SongVest
SongVest has positioned itself explicitly as seller-friendly, with no seller fees and a free valuation. Their platform supports:
- Individual song sales
- Partial percentage sales
- Catalog-level transactions
Their no-fee model makes smaller partial transactions more viable than platforms that charge sellers a percentage.
ANote Music
For European artists and catalogs, ANote Music operates a fractional marketplace specifically designed for partial ownership interests. They offer a secondary market for previously-sold fractional interests, which adds liquidity — if investors can sell their stakes later, they’re willing to pay closer to fair value today. ANote’s model is particularly attractive for European indie artists who want a regulated, exchange-style platform for partial sales.
Real-World Examples of Partial Deal Structures
While most catalog transaction details are private, the market has produced several notable partial sale examples that illustrate how the structure works in practice:
Concord’s ABS structure: Concord Music’s 2025 $1.76 billion asset-backed securities transaction — backed by 1.3 million copyrights — was valued at $5.1 billion. While this is a corporate-level transaction, it illustrates that institutional buyers are comfortable with partial and fractional ownership structures at enormous scale. The same structural flexibility that operates at $5 billion scale also applies to individual artist transactions.
Hipgnosis’s fractional model: Hipgnosis Songs Fund built its entire business model on acquiring partial and full catalog interests and packaging them into a publicly traded fund. Their approach validated that partial interests in music catalogs are legitimate, tradeable assets — paving the way for smaller-scale partial transactions.
Royalty Exchange transactions: Royalty Exchange regularly facilitates transactions where artists sell specific royalty streams — often a fixed percentage of annual income from a defined set of songs — rather than complete catalogs. Artists maintain the writer’s share (which is non-transferable), sell a portion of the publisher’s or label’s share, and continue to participate in their catalog’s income.
Round Hill and DeadMau5: The $55 million deal Round Hill Music Group struck for DeadMau5’s catalog in 2025 reportedly included provisions for the artist to participate in future value growth through shared economic structures — illustrating that even large full-catalog transactions can incorporate partial-sale-like economics.
Pricing a Partial Sale: What to Expect
Partial interests typically trade at a discount to their pro-rata share of full catalog value. Understanding this discount helps you negotiate.
Why buyers discount partial interests:
- Administrative overhead: managing 25% of a catalog costs nearly as much as managing 100%
- Approval rights: without majority ownership, the buyer can’t unilaterally make licensing decisions
- Exit optionality: a partial interest is harder to resell than a full catalog
Typical discounts by ownership percentage:
| Percentage Sold | Typical Discount to Pro-Rata Value | Effective Multiple Compression |
|---|---|---|
| 75%–100% | 0%–5% | Minimal |
| 50%–74% | 5%–10% | Moderate |
| 25%–49% | 10%–20% | Meaningful |
| Under 25% | 15%–25% | Significant |
Practical implication: If your full catalog would sell at 15x NPS, a 50% interest might sell at 12x–14x the NPS of that 50%. The larger the percentage you sell, the closer to full-value pro-rata terms you can expect.
The discount shrinks when:
- The buyer receives control rights (majority interest or licensing approval authority)
- The catalog is well-documented and easy to administer
- The auction process is competitive (Royalty Exchange’s model helps here)
- You provide strong governance and reporting infrastructure
Pros and Cons Summary
Why Partial Sales Work
Liquidity without full exit: Access capital now while retaining long-term income. This is the core appeal — bridge financing from your own future royalties.
Keep the upside you believe in: If you’re confident your catalog will grow in value (sync opportunities, genre trending up, streaming growth), retain the portion you most believe in.
Emotional preservation: Keeping even a minority interest in your catalog maintains a connection to your creative legacy. Many artists find this psychologically meaningful.
Flexibility for estate planning: A partial sale can simplify estate planning by converting some illiquid catalog value into cash while leaving a manageable ownership stake for heirs.
No binary decision: The hardest part of a full catalog sale is that it’s irreversible. A partial sale lets you test the market, establish a relationship with a buyer, and retain optionality.
Why Partial Sales Have Drawbacks
Lower effective price per dollar of income: The discounts described above are real. If maximizing total transaction value is the priority, a full sale often yields better economics.
Increased administrative complexity: Managing split ownership of royalties — even with modern collection infrastructure — creates ongoing work. Co-ownership means two parties receiving statements, two parties needing to agree on licensing decisions in some structures.
Buyer approval rights: Many buyers of significant partial interests will negotiate for approval rights on licensing decisions. This limits your control over your own catalog.
Finding willing buyers is harder: The deepest pool of buyers is for full catalog acquisitions. Partial interest buyers are a subset. For smaller catalogs, this may mean fewer competitive bids and lower prices.
How to Approach a Partial Sale
-
Establish your full catalog value first. Use our free Music Catalog Valuation Calculator to understand what 100% of your catalog is worth. That’s your anchor.
-
Decide what you want to sell and why. Are you seeking liquidity for a specific purpose? Do you want to retain specific songs? Are you testing the market? Your goal shapes which structure makes sense.
-
Quantify the income associated with what you’re selling. If selling 50%, calculate 50% of NPS and the resulting value at market multiples.
-
Choose your platform or buyer approach. Royalty Exchange for auction-style competitive bids on royalty interests; SongVest for song-specific listings; direct approach to catalog funds for larger transactions.
-
Negotiate governance clearly. The most important negotiation in a partial sale is not the price — it’s the approval rights structure. Know going in what decisions you want to retain unilateral control over (sync approvals for major placements, licensing to competitors, etc.).
-
Legal review is essential. Partial sale agreements are more complex than full catalog transfers. The governance provisions, reporting requirements, and co-ownership obligations need careful drafting. Budget for music attorney review.
For the full transaction process, see How to Sell Your Music Catalog: The Complete 2026 Guide.
FAQ: Partial Music Catalog Sales
Can I sell just some of my songs and keep the rest? Yes. Platforms like SongVest are specifically designed for song-by-song sales. You can list individual songs or groups of songs, receive bids, and sell only those while retaining full ownership of everything else in your catalog.
Will I get full price for a partial sale? Not quite. Partial interests typically trade at a 5-20% discount to their pro-rata share of full catalog value, depending on the percentage sold. The more you sell, the closer to full-value terms you’ll achieve. Competitive auction platforms like Royalty Exchange help minimize this discount.
Can I sell a percentage of royalties without transferring copyright ownership? Yes. You can transfer economic rights (the right to receive royalty income) without transferring the underlying copyright. This is often done through an assignment of royalty interests or a participation agreement. Your attorney can draft the appropriate structure.
What happens if I sell 50% and want to sell the other 50% later? This is possible but complicates the second transaction. The second buyer will want to understand the existing ownership structure, any governance rights the first buyer holds, and the combined reporting/administration picture. Plan for this from the beginning — ideally with clear provisions in the first agreement that describe future sale rights.
How long does a partial catalog sale take? Marketplace transactions (Royalty Exchange, SongVest) can close in 30-60 days for partial interests. Direct negotiations with catalog funds typically take 2-4 months, slightly shorter than full catalog transactions because the due diligence scope is proportionally smaller.
Ready to find out what your catalog is worth? Use our free Music Catalog Valuation Calculator — knowing the value of your full catalog is the essential starting point for any partial sale strategy.
Get a free catalog valuation
Find out what your music catalog is worth in today's market.