Is R-squared Useless?

https://data.library.virginia.edu/is-r-squared-useless/

what constitutes as good R square (R2) variance:

1) Falk and Miller (1992) recommended that R2 values should be equal to or greater than 0.10 in order for the variance explained of a particular endogenous construct to be deemed adequate.

2) Cohen (1988) suggested R2 values for endogenous latent variables are assessed as follows: 0.26 (substantial), 0.13 (moderate), 0.02 (weak).

3) Chin (1998) recommended R2 values for endogenous latent variables based on: 0.67 (substantial), 0.33 (moderate), 0.19 (weak).

4) Hair et al. (2011) & Hair et al. (2013) suggested in scholarly research that focuses on marketing issues, R2 values of 0.75, 0.50, or 0.25 for endogenous latent variables can, as a rough rule of thumb, be respectively described as substantial, moderate or weak.

line 3 of Table 1 of Ferguson (2009: article also includes discussion, which I suggest you also read, in addition to previous commenters comments): http://psychology.okstate.edu/faculty/jgrice/psyc3214/Ferguson_EffectSizes_2009.pdf