The three things a group programme needs
A cohort with a start and an end. Not a rolling membership — a defined group moving through defined material on a schedule, with progress visible per participant.
Somewhere they talk to each other. The peer element is most of why group coaching works. A cohort with no discussion space is a webinar series.
Group billing. Per-seat pricing, instalments, and ideally a waitlist for the next run. Selling twelve seats individually by invoice is how a profitable model becomes an administrative one.
Products generally supply one or two of the three, and the missing one becomes a second subscription with a separate participant list.
Cohorts, community and billing
| Product | Price | Cohorts | Community | Group billing | Same records as 1:1 |
|---|
| Coachfulours | from $29 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Mighty Networks | $41 | Best here | Strong | Yes | No |
| Skool & Circle | $99 | Limited | Best here | Yes | No |
| Kajabi | $179 | Partial | A module | Yes | No |
| Thinkific | $49 | Yes | Course-attached | Yes | No |
| Delenta | $19 | Partial | No | Partial | Yes |
Comparison registry, verified May 2026. The final column is what determines whether the 20 to 30% conversion into one-to-one work is visible.
What actually goes wrong with group programmes
Filling it. The whole problem, and no software solves it. A cohort at half capacity costs the same delivery hours and produces half the revenue, half the peer dynamic and half the conversions.
Inventing it live. A programme designed in week one and delivered in week three is designed in front of twelve people. Build it from something you have already run one-to-one a dozen times; the curriculum is in your history.
Unbounded access. Twelve people with unlimited messaging is a different job from one person with it. Define the contact window in the package before somebody tests it.
Not tracking the conversion. A fifth to a third of participants will buy one-to-one afterwards, and most coaches never measure it, which means they never run the programme again for the right reason.
Why a half-full cohort is worse than none
The delivery hours are identical. Six participants take the same weekly call, the same preparation and the same materials as twelve, for half the revenue.
The peer dynamic also fails below about six, and the peer dynamic is most of why group coaching produces better outcomes than the same content delivered one-to-one. A thin room is a worse product, not just a less profitable one.
And it is demoralising in a way that shows. Coaches deliver a half-full cohort with visibly less energy, participants notice, and the testimonials that would have filled the next run do not arrive.
Which is why pre-selling matters more here than anywhere: if eight people will not commit before it exists, running it anyway is the expensive choice.
The verdict
Mighty Networks binds cohorts to community more tightly than we do, and Skool and Circle run a better community outright. On the group experience alone, either is a defensible choice.
Coachful wins the stated criterion because the participants stay on the same client list as your one-to-one work, and that is where the 20 to 30% conversion lives. Split across two products, the most valuable output of a group programme is the one you cannot see.
