LinkedIn Post Character Limit: Where "See More" Actually Cuts It Off
LinkedIn does not publish an official number for this. Here's what's actually been measured.
Search for "LinkedIn character limit" and you'll find a dozen numbers repeated across marketing blogs — 3,000, 1,300, 700, 210 — cited with no source. Every checker that tests platform limits against LinkedIn runs into the same wall: LinkedIn's own help pages give a maximum for the profile summary and the headline, but they say nothing about where a feed post gets cut. That's not an oversight on the checkers' part. There is no first-party number to cite, because LinkedIn treats the feed truncation point as a rendering decision, not a published limit.
In a hurry? Paste your post into Character Limit Checker to see where the cut lands — the measured numbers are below.
What LinkedIn does publish
Two numbers are first-party and stable:
- Post composer hard cap: LinkedIn's compose box stops accepting input at 3,000 characters. This is the one number you can rely on — go over it and the platform simply won't let you type more.
- Headline: 220 characters, enforced the same way, in the profile editor.
Neither of those is the number most people are actually asking about. The question behind "LinkedIn character limit" is almost always: how much of my post shows before it gets folded under "…see more"? That number isn't in the 3,000-character cap — it's a display truncation applied on top of it, and LinkedIn doesn't document it because it isn't a hard rule the way Twitter's 280 is. It depends on the client (desktop web, mobile app), the viewport, and has moved before without an announcement.
What's actually been observed
Third-party measurement — social media scheduling tools that track this because their customers ask, and marketers who've tested it directly — converges on a range rather than one number:
| Surface | Observed truncation | Source grade |
|---|---|---|
| Desktop feed post | About 140-210 characters before "…see more" | Third-party, converging |
| Mobile app feed post | Shorter than desktop, varies by device width | Third-party, observed |
| First comment on a post | Separate, shorter truncation, distinct from the post body | Third-party, observed |
None of these are first-party numbers. Treat the 140–210 range as "where to expect the fold," not as a guaranteed cutoff — LinkedIn has changed feed rendering before, and it can again. If you need your hook (the part that earns the click on "see more") to survive, the safe move is to put your strongest line in the first 140 characters, not to trust an exact number.
LinkedIn Articles are a different limit entirely
If what you're writing is a LinkedIn Article (the long-form publishing feature, not a feed post), the relevant cap is much larger — LinkedIn's help documentation puts the article body limit at 110,000 characters. That's a different product with a different, actually-published number, and confusing the two is the most common reason someone finds a "LinkedIn limit" that doesn't match what they're seeing on their own feed post.
Checking a different platform, or want the exact byte and grapheme count of your draft? Character Limit Checker runs one piece of text against every platform limit that is officially published — X, Instagram, Discord, meta description and title tags, SMS segments — side by side, and shows the exact point each one cuts. It intentionally has no LinkedIn feed row, for the same reason this page just explained: there's nothing first-party to check it against.
Related pages here: the same counting problem on platforms that do publish a number is covered in the Twitter/X weighted-character rule, which charges Korean and Japanese text more per glyph, and Discord's six embed limits, which all apply at once. Why a web form counts a line break as one character in the box and two in what it submits is in 자소서 글자수, 공백 포함인가 (Korean).