Patreon reportedly takes 5%. Youtube Premium takes 45% according to [1]. But it's also a very different model, where patreon requires that you signup for a specific channel, and youtube distributes your money based on watch time. So in theory Youtube's model is better for small creators without a large community. Another way to see it is that youtube provides you with discoverability while Patreon does not, usually creators will have Patreon in addition to Youtube where they get discovered and sell their Patreon.
Youtube also has a subscription similar to Patreon, available only to larger creators and they take 30% off that, according to [2]. While this seems high compared to Patreon it's actually lower than Twitch that takes 50% off subscriptions.
Twitch also offer a bit system that is like a tip, and has a lower percentage.
Another datapoint is OnlyFans, used mostly for porn and takes 60%.
IMO the platforms are very distinct and their offers are fairly different. It's not a fair comparison.
It makes sense for Youtube to take a big share of the money given that they have to host and stream the videos but how can OnlyFans justify to get an even bigger share? Aren't they effectively Patreon for (mostly) porn? If there's so much money to make in this sector why isn't there more competition?
Their USP may be that they navigate the problem of payment providers etc. Getting money for porn and weed is notoriously hard because very few of the intermediary participants are willing to play along if that's the use case.
Because good platforms that allow adult content are in very short supply, so they can charge a premium. To a certain extent, they MUST charge a premium because being in the adult industry makes everyone else charge YOU more also. None of the normal payment processors or advertisers will touch you, etc.
