Creative fatigue usually shows up before teams admit it. Your top ad starts slipping, the next batch of edits takes too long, and every stakeholder wants both brand polish and performance velocity. That’s when the search for video advertising agencies starts, and it’s rarely a simple vendor hunt.

The hard part isn’t finding firms that can make good-looking video. It’s finding a partner whose operating model matches how you grow. Some agencies are built for breakout brand spots. Some are built for paid social iteration. Some are really creator networks with service layers. And now AI platforms sit in the mix, which changes the make-versus-buy decision entirely.

That timing matters more than ever because video is taking a larger share of marketing budgets. In 2024, U.S. digital video ad spend grew 18% year over year to reach $64 billion, and it’s projected to rise to $72 billion in 2025, according to the IAB 2025 Video Ad Spend Report. If your team is responsible for performance on Meta, TikTok, YouTube, or CTV, you’re not choosing a creative partner on the margins. You’re deciding who helps manage one of your most important budget lines.

The market is also crowded because demand is real. Businesses have made video standard practice, and marketers keep pushing more resources toward it, which means the best video advertising agencies now specialize hard instead of trying to be everything to everyone.

So this isn’t just a directory. It’s a practical hiring guide. If you need a traditional production partner, you’ll see who fits. If you need a performance shop that can pump out tests every week, that’s here too. And if you’re debating whether an agency is even the right answer versus an AI creative platform like AdCrafty, you’ll get a cleaner framework for that decision.

1. Harmon Brothers

Harmon Brothers

Harmon Brothers is the name I’d put on the shortlist when a brand wants memorable direct-response creative, not just another batch of interchangeable paid social edits. They’re known for humorous, story-led ads that still aim at conversion. That matters because a lot of agencies can do “brand video,” and a lot can do “UGC-style performance.” Fewer can hold attention and sell at the same time.

Their strongest fit is a company with a product that can handle a stronger point of view. If your category rewards clarity, entertainment, and a slightly bigger swing, Harmon Brothers makes sense. If your legal team strips every script of personality, you’ll probably overpay for a process you can’t fully use.

Where they fit best

They’re strongest when the brief calls for a hero concept that can later feed cutdowns, hooks, and channel-specific variants. That’s useful for teams running YouTube, Meta, and even TV or streaming in parallel.

A practical upside is that they don’t approach video like a one-off asset. The better direct-response shops think in systems: concept, script, production, post, then iteration. If you’re trying to understand what good ad structures look like before you hire anyone, AdCrafty’s guide to video advertising examples is a useful reference point.

Practical rule: Hire Harmon Brothers when you need a campaign concept people will actually remember. Don’t hire them just to fill a weekly testing calendar with low-stakes variants.

Trade-offs

The trade-off is obvious. This is a premium production model. It usually means more planning, more rounds of alignment, and less raw output volume than a creator marketplace or AI workflow.

That doesn’t make it worse. It makes it narrower. For the right product and the right launch window, that narrower fit is a strength.

Best for brand-led direct response: Strong when you need story, humor, and conversion in the same ad.
Less ideal for constant asset churn: Not the first pick if your entire strategy depends on daily iteration.
Works best with conviction: Brands that second-guess bold creative usually won’t get full value from this model.

2. Chamber.Media

Chamber.Media

A common hiring scenario looks like this. The media team needs more winning creative for Meta, the founder wants stronger product storytelling, and the in-house team does not have the production capacity to keep both moving. Chamber.Media tends to fit that middle ground well.

Chamber.Media is built for brands that need ads to sell products, not just polish a brand reel. Their model makes more sense for e-commerce operators with active paid social budgets than for marketing teams shopping for a single high-production launch film. If the primary need is a repeatable creative engine with offers, hooks, demos, and landing-page-aware messaging, they are easier to justify than a traditional production shop.

Where they tend to outperform

Their strength is operational. Chamber.Media usually works best with brands that already know their unit economics and need creative that maps to specific funnel jobs. That includes prospecting ads, product education, objection handling, and retargeting assets that can spend without burning out in a week.

That matters because format strategy is often where agency selection goes wrong. A lot of brands buy one polished concept and then ask it to do every job in the funnel. Chamber’s approach is more structured than that. If you want a preview of how AI-led workflows compare with that agency model, this guide to an AI video ad generator is a useful reference before you write an RFP.

Wyzowl’s 2024 video marketing report found that 91% of businesses use video as a marketing tool. The implication is simple. Video itself is no longer the advantage. The advantage comes from matching the right creative angle to the right stage of demand.

What to ask before you hire them

Ask how they separate a scalable control from a one-off winner. Ask what percentage of their process is net-new concepting versus adapting proven frameworks. Ask who owns post-launch iteration once the first batch of ads is live.

Those questions matter because Chamber.Media sits in a category with clear trade-offs. Frameworks improve speed and consistency. They can also flatten brand voice if your product needs a sharper point of view or if your category is crowded with similar direct-response creative.

The real evaluation question is whether their system can produce repeatable winners without making your brand feel interchangeable.

Best for performance-minded e-commerce teams: Strong fit when paid social needs a steady stream of product-selling creative.
Useful across the funnel: Better than many shops at building ads for awareness, education, and conversion instead of stopping at the hero asset.
Watch for style fit: Brands with a highly specific tone or premium positioning should review recent work closely and ask for examples from adjacent categories.

3. MuteSix (a dentsu company)

MuteSix (a dentsu company)

A common hiring scenario looks like this. Paid social spend is large enough to expose weak creative fast, but the internal team still cannot produce, launch, and revise enough video ads to keep pace with Meta and TikTok. MuteSix tends to enter the conversation at that point.

MuteSix is a practical option for brands that want one partner responsible for both media buying and the creative feedback loop. That model matters because many video advertising agencies still separate production from performance analysis. Once those functions split, revision cycles slow down and creative debates become subjective.

MuteSix has long been tied to DTC growth and paid social. If your budget is concentrated on Meta, TikTok, and short-form conversion creative, that specialization helps. If you need a brand film, executive storytelling, or a B2B narrative system for longer sales cycles, I would screen other agency types first.

Their StudioSix offer is also easier to price than a loose retainer. That is useful for teams comparing a traditional agency against newer AI-assisted workflows. The actual decision is not agency versus software in the abstract. It is which parts of the workflow need senior strategy and which parts need fast production volume. If your team already knows how to brief hooks, offers, and creator-style concepts, an agency may be overkill for baseline output. If you are still building the testing system, agency support can save expensive trial and error.

That trade-off shows up in format choice too. Short-form social creative keeps pushing toward volume, creator fluency, and rapid iteration. HubSpot notes in its 2024 State of Marketing report that short-form video delivers the highest ROI among content formats, which helps explain why brands keep prioritizing production systems over one-off hero assets. In that environment, MuteSix is competing not only with other agencies, but also with internal teams using UGC ad workflows and creator-style formats to keep testing velocity high.

What to ask in the sales process

Ask who owns the testing roadmap after the first batch of ads launches. Ask how often creative reviews happen with media buyers in the room. Ask for a recent example where spend shifted because a hook pattern or offer angle failed, and what they produced next.

Those questions tell you whether MuteSix operates like a true performance partner or merely a paid social agency with an attached studio.

Best for paid social-led growth: Strong fit for DTC brands where Meta and TikTok drive a meaningful share of acquisition.
Good option for teams that need structure: Packaged creative services make budgeting and scoping simpler than fully custom production engagements.
Watch the fit for smaller advertisers: If spend is still modest or your need is mainly raw creative volume, a lighter UGC shop or AI creative platform may be more efficient.

4. Tinuiti

Tinuiti

A common hiring scenario looks like this. Paid social is working, YouTube is under review, Amazon may need video, and leadership wants one reporting view instead of three agency decks that never line up. Tinuiti fits that kind of account better than a pure production shop.

Tinuiti is built for advertisers that need creative tied directly to media operations, measurement, and budget allocation across channels. The value is coordination. Creative, bidding, pacing, and attribution affect each other, so a team that can handle them together often makes better decisions than a studio handing assets to a separate media buyer.

That trade-off matters more as brands spread spend across social, retail media, online video, and streaming. eMarketer forecasts that US connected TV ad spending will keep climbing through 2026, which is one reason larger brands are reworking how they brief video by channel instead of asking one asset to do every job on every platform, according to EMARKETER's CTV ad spending forecast.

One useful filter before hiring a firm like this is creative mix. Teams still need to decide where polished brand work belongs, where direct-response cuts belong, and when UGC ads for paid social testing should carry more of the load. Tinuiti can operate inside that mix, but the client usually still needs a clear point of view on what each format is supposed to accomplish.

Where Tinuiti gets expensive is speed. If the brief is "ship 20 creator-style variants next week and test hooks until CPA drops," a large integrated agency can feel heavy. If the brief is "coordinate YouTube, Meta, CTV, and measurement under one strategy," the structure starts to pay for itself.

I usually ask tougher RFP questions with agencies in this category. Who signs off on channel-specific creative strategy? How often do media and creative teams review performance together? What changed in the last quarter because incrementality, lift data, or platform-level performance showed the original plan was wrong?

Those answers tell you whether Tinuiti is set up to improve decisions, or just package production and media under one contract.

Best for multi-channel advertisers: Strong fit when social video, YouTube, CTV, or retail media all influence acquisition.
Useful for teams that need reporting discipline: Better fit for brands that care about attribution, planning cadence, and budget reallocation.
Less efficient for raw creative volume: Smaller teams running fast creator-style testing may get better output from a specialized UGC shop or an AI creative platform.

5. Vidsy

Vidsy

A common hiring mistake looks like this: the team needs fresh TikTok and Meta creative every week, but they hire a traditional video agency built for campaign shoots, not creator throughput. A month later, they have a polished hero asset, very few testable variants, and no reliable way to brief, source, review, and replace creators at speed.

Vidsy fits the gap between those two extremes. It gives brands access to creator-led production with more control than freelance creator wrangling and more volume than a concept-heavy agency usually delivers.

That distinction matters. Vidsy is not the shop I would pick for a high-stakes brand anthem or a tightly scripted launch film. It is better suited to teams that already know short-form creative wins through iteration, creator fit, and a steady testing cadence.

Why the model works

Value is operational. Vidsy helps brands source creators, manage briefs, collect assets, and keep content moving through a repeatable system. For performance teams, that often matters more than having one standout idea.

Analysts at WARC have pointed to creator and social video as a growing share of ad investment, which tracks with what many operators already see in-platform: more spend is flowing toward formats that need constant refreshes, not one-off productions. That makes Vidsy more relevant for brands that judge creative partners on throughput, not only concept quality.

This model is also useful for companies choosing between a specialist agency and an AI creative platform. If the bottleneck is finding real creators, getting native-feeling footage, and managing approvals across many contributors, Vidsy can solve a problem software alone does not. If the bottleneck is turning existing footage into more hooks, cuts, and on-screen text variants for rapid testing, an AI tool may be faster and cheaper.

Where it breaks down

Vidsy works best when the brief leaves room for creator interpretation and testing. It gets less efficient when every line, scene, and claim needs tight brand or legal control. B2B teams, regulated categories, and brands with rigid approval chains should pressure-test that fit early.

I would ask pointed RFP questions here. How do they match creators to audience segments? What does revision control look like when ten creators interpret the same brief differently? Who owns usage rights, paid media permissions, and reshoots if the first batch misses?

Best for creator-led paid social: Strong fit for brands that need recurring UGC-style ads for TikTok, Reels, and Meta.
Good for teams without in-house creator ops: Useful if sourcing, briefing, and coordinating creators is slowing down production.
Weaker for scripted brand campaigns: Less suited to launch films, narrative spots, or heavily controlled B2B messaging.

6. Shuttlerock

Shuttlerock

A common hiring mistake is using a concept-led agency for a production problem. If your team already has product shots, brand templates, customer footage, and a paid media calendar, Shuttlerock is worth looking at because the value is operational. They help turn existing assets into a repeatable stream of channel-ready video ads.

That puts them in a different bucket from agencies hired to invent a new brand platform or direct a high-stakes launch film. Shuttlerock fits better when the brief is clear, the asset library is usable, and the marketing team needs volume with dependable turnaround.

The model is strongest for performance and lifecycle teams that need creative refreshed across formats, placements, and audiences without starting every month from zero. According to Meta's guidance on creative diversification for advertisers, varying creative assets across placements and audiences improves delivery and testing coverage, which is exactly the kind of workflow Shuttlerock is built to support.

Where they fit best

Shuttlerock makes sense when the production bottleneck sits in adaptation, versioning, and throughput. Retail, ecommerce, travel, and consumer subscription brands often have this issue. They have enough raw material already. What they lack is a disciplined system to convert those materials into usable ad variants across Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and display video.

I would not hire them expecting a breakthrough creative leap on their own. I would hire them when the strategy is already defined and the team needs more outputs per campaign, tighter production ops, and less chaos in the handoff between brand and paid media.

Trade-offs to pressure-test

Creative-as-a-Service works well when brand rules are established and the team values consistency. It gets less attractive when the business needs a sharp new angle, heavier storytelling, or category-defining creative risk.

That trade-off matters in this article because many teams are also comparing agencies with AI creative tools. If your input is a well-organized asset library and the main job is editing, resizing, and producing more variants, an AI platform may cover part of the need at a lower cost. If the challenge includes workflow management, human design judgment, localization, and recurring multi-format delivery, a service model like Shuttlerock can still be the better buy.

Ask direct RFP questions before you commit. How much net-new creative thinking is included versus adaptation work? How do they handle testing insights from paid media teams? What is the revision process when local markets need changes fast? Those answers will tell you whether you are buying a production engine or a true creative partner.

Best for asset-rich teams: Strong fit for brands that already have usable footage, templates, and clear channel requirements.
Useful for always-on paid media: Good option when output volume and versioning matter more than a one-off hero concept.
Less suited for repositioning work: A weaker fit if the business needs fresh creative strategy before it needs more production.

7. Consumer Acquisition (by Brainlabs)

Consumer Acquisition (by Brainlabs)

Brainlabs and its Consumer Acquisition offering are much more specialized than many brand marketers realize. This is a strong option for app growth teams, gaming advertisers, and user-acquisition operators who need creative testing tied tightly to install or conversion goals.

I wouldn’t treat them as a generalist recommendation. I’d treat them as a category pick for teams who already think in UA workflows.

Why specialization helps

App growth requires a different creative discipline from standard e-commerce. You’re often balancing gameplay footage, product explanation, hooks, app store assets, and rapid testing across channels that reward iteration. A broad “video agency” can struggle here because the learning loop is more technical and more performance-led.

That makes Consumer Acquisition useful if your team wants both managed services and a system for creative research and workflow. In mobile growth, operational rigor matters as much as raw creative taste.

Where they outperform generalists

They’re strongest when your team has enough spend and enough data to support continuous experimentation. If your app is just getting started and your budget is still tentative, a specialized studio may be more infrastructure than you need.

Best for app and gaming teams: Particularly valuable when install performance drives the brief.
Testing-focused model: Better suited to high-frequency experimentation than broad brand storytelling.
Not the best B2B fit: SaaS teams selling through longer sales cycles may want a different type of partner.

8. VaynerMedia

VaynerMedia

A common hiring mistake shows up after the kickoff. The brand wants social-first creative at volume, but the internal review chain, paid media handoff, and regional approvals all sit in different places. That is the kind of environment where VaynerMedia tends to make sense.

They are built for brands that treat video as part of an ongoing content operation, not a one-off production project. The appeal is less about a single hero ad and more about having a partner that can produce for platforms, coordinate with media, and keep creative output aligned across a large organization.

That distinction matters.

VaynerMedia is usually a better fit for enterprise teams than for lean operators because their value comes from process, resourcing, and cross-channel coordination. If your team needs ten approvals before an ad goes live, structure helps. If your team writes scripts in Slack and launches edits the same day, that same structure can feel slow.

What stands out

Their strength is the operating model. VaynerMedia can support brands that need social creative, paid distribution, and a broader content system under one roof. For marketing leaders trying to reduce handoff friction between creative and media, that has real value.

The trade-off is cost and complexity. Large agency systems often bring more meetings, more stakeholders, and more formal workflows. That is useful when brand risk is high. It is less attractive when the brief is simple and speed matters more than organizational coverage.

For context, analysts at Statista project global social media advertising spend to keep growing through 2028, which supports the case for agencies built around platform-native creative and media execution (Statista social media advertising market outlook). VaynerMedia is one of the clearer examples of that model at scale.

How to evaluate them

Ask how much of the work will be custom strategy versus a standardized enterprise process. Ask who owns iteration after launch. Ask whether your team will get channel-specific creative testing or a broader brand-social program with slower feedback loops.

That last point is where buyers should be careful. If you are comparing a traditional agency against an AI creative platform like AdCrafty, the question is not quality versus automation. It is whether you need organizational coverage or faster creative throughput. VaynerMedia is the stronger pick when brand governance, stakeholder management, and integrated execution matter more than low-friction testing.

Best for complex organizations: Strong fit for brands with multiple stakeholders, markets, or channel owners.
Useful for integrated social execution: Better when creative, distribution, and content operations need to stay connected.
Less efficient for small, fast teams: The overhead can outweigh the benefit if you mainly need rapid ad iteration.

9. Sandwich

A common hiring mistake shows up when a company has a strong product, decent demand, and weak explanation. Traffic lands. Sales calls happen. Prospects still do not quite get the product. Sandwich is a good fit for that specific problem.

They are one of the better-known shops for product storytelling, especially in tech. If you sell software, hardware, or a new category that needs a customer to understand the product before they trust it, Sandwich is usually more relevant than a pure performance creative vendor. Their strength is making the product feel clear, useful, and desirable without forcing everything into direct-response conventions.

That distinction matters. Some agencies are built to produce weekly ad variants for paid social. Sandwich is usually the stronger option when the first job is to explain the product well enough that every downstream asset gets easier to make.

Why buyers shortlist them

Their work tends to hold up across a launch video, homepage explainer, investor narrative, paid cutdowns, and sales enablement. That versatility is valuable for B2B SaaS teams and startup marketers who need one strong core message before they scale distribution.

Wyzowl’s 2024 State of Video Marketing found that marketers use video heavily for product education and for driving understanding before purchase. That lines up with where Sandwich tends to perform best. They are a better strategic match for explanation-led marketing than for constant creative churn.

Where the trade-off shows up

The same discipline that makes their work strong can slow teams that need high testing volume. If your media plan depends on fresh hooks, creator-style ads, and weekly iteration across Meta, TikTok, or YouTube, a traditional production model like this can become expensive and slow relative to an AI creative platform or a UGC-focused partner.

My rule of thumb is simple. Hire Sandwich when message clarity is the bottleneck. Choose a faster production system when the message already works and the need is throughput.

How to evaluate them

Ask what they need from your product team to get to a clear story fast. Ask how they translate one flagship concept into paid cutdowns, website assets, and sales content. Ask who owns iteration after the launch film ships, because that is often where teams discover they still need a second partner for testing and volume.

Best for product-led brands: Strong fit when customer understanding drives conversion.
Useful for launch and explainer work: One clear concept can support site video, paid edits, and sales collateral.
Less suited to high-volume testing: Teams that need constant ad refreshes may want an agency or platform built for faster iteration.

10. NoGood

A common hiring scenario looks like this. Paid social is spending enough to expose creative fatigue fast, the growth team wants weekly testing, and the brand team still wants message control. NoGood is a reasonable fit for companies stuck in that middle ground, especially DTC and SaaS teams that want one partner shaping both the test plan and the assets.

That operating model matters. When strategy, media thinking, and creative production sit with the same team, it is easier to trace a miss back to the offer, the audience, the hook, or the edit instead of getting three different explanations from three vendors.

Why they’re worth considering

NoGood makes more sense as a growth partner than as a pure production shop. The value is not just making videos. The value is helping decide what to test, which messages deserve more budget, and where human creative work still beats automation.

That distinction matters more now because teams are splitting video work across agencies, creators, internal editors, and AI tools. Wyzowl’s Video Marketing Statistics 2024 shows how widely video has been adopted across marketing teams. The practical question is no longer whether to invest in video. It is which parts of the workflow need strategic oversight and which parts can be standardized.

Agency or AI platform?

This is the trade-off I would pressure-test in an RFP. If the problem is weak positioning, unclear offers, or a sloppy testing process, an agency like NoGood can justify the cost because it helps improve the decision-making behind the ads. If the strategy already works and the problem is volume, turnaround time, and variant production, an AI creative platform is often the better buy.

That is why NoGood belongs in a modern shortlist, not just a generic agency directory. They sit in the category between traditional brand production and pure creative automation.

Ask how they structure experimentation across channels. Ask who owns performance readouts and how quickly losing concepts get cut. Ask what work they still believe should be done by people, not templates or AI generation. Those answers will tell you whether you are hiring strategic judgment or paying agency rates for project management.

Best for integrated growth teams: Useful when media strategy, testing, and creative need to stay connected.
Good fit for SaaS and DTC: Stronger match for teams buying against performance goals, not just producing a brand film.
Should be compared against AI platforms: A smart choice when the bottleneck is strategy. A weaker value if you only need faster asset output.

Top 10 Video Advertising Agencies Comparison

Agency	Core Offering	Best Suited For	Unique Strength / USP	Speed & Scale	Typical Budget / Price	Limitations
Harmon Brothers	Script-to-post direct-response video (humor-led)	Brands wanting story-led, viral-style ads	Proven long-form + short-form playbooks and viral track record	High production value; longer timelines	High, project-based agency fees	Humor may not fit all verticals; costly/slower
Chamber.Media	Performance-first video production + testing framework	Ecommerce/DTC scaling on social, YouTube, CTV	"7 Foundational Ad Types" and huge testing volume (>300k ads)	Large-scale production built for rapid testing	Mid–High; likely requires larger budgets	Can feel formulaic; pricing not public
MuteSix (dentsu)	In-house StudioSix direct-response video for paid social	DTC brands focused on TikTok/Meta performance	60+ creative team, TikTok early partner, packaged tiers	Fast iteration with packaged deliverables	Mid–High; packages add costs	Enterprise orientation may over-serve small teams
Tinuiti	Paid social + YouTube/CTV strategy with cross-channel measurement	Mid-market to enterprise needing measurement & benchmarks	Cross-channel measurement and market benchmarking	Enterprise-scale ops; longer onboarding	Mid–High; minimums common	Less suitable for SMBs; onboarding can be slow
Vidsy	Creator network + platform for UGC-style ad production	Brands needing ongoing creator-driven UGC output	Efficient asset remixing + vetted creator workflow	High output for continuous testing	Subscription/volume pricing; mid-range to high	Not ideal for high-concept big-budget work
Shuttlerock	Creative-as-a-Service turning assets into platform-specific video	Brands needing predictable monthly creative	Subscription model with SLAs and fast turnarounds	Fast, predictable cadence for always-on ads	Subscription; pricing tiers (not public)	Works best with existing assets; pricing opaque
Consumer Acquisition (Brainlabs)	Mobile UA creative studio + AdRules analytics	App growth and gaming UA teams	Deep UA specialization and creative testing tools	Built for high-frequency UA testing	Mid–High; pricing/minimums not public	Less aligned for non-app advertisers
VaynerMedia	Integrated creative + media for social, video, streaming	Brands needing multi-channel, enterprise-scale programs	Combines creative and distribution at scale; social-first	Very large-scale; strong distribution & testing	Enterprise pricing	Big-agency cost and process; heavy for SMBs
Sandwich	Product-centric launch films and performance cutdowns	Tech startups and category disruptors	Clarity-first product storytelling with tight creative control	Project-based with premium production timelines	Premium/project rates	Not optimized for very high-volume monthly output
NoGood	Growth marketing + performance-oriented UGC and testing	DTC and SaaS brands needing creative + experimentation	Blends data-driven strategy with creative execution	Flexible; focused on experimentation and iteration	Variable; pricing via discovery	Less focused on TV/CTV; pricing not public

Your Next Move in Video Advertising

A team hires a video agency after a strong pitch. Three months later, they have one polished brand film, no testing cadence, and no answer for rising CPAs on Meta and TikTok. That outcome usually starts with a bad brief, but it also comes from choosing the wrong operating model.

The agencies in this list are built for different jobs. Harmon Brothers and Sandwich are very different buys from Vidsy or Shuttlerock. Tinuiti and VaynerMedia solve a different problem than a UGC network or a creative subscription service. AdCrafty belongs in the same evaluation set too, because for some teams the better question is not which agency to hire, but which work should stay in-house with AI-assisted production.

Start with the bottleneck, not the reel.

If the issue is strategy, concept development, or a launch that carries brand risk, a traditional creative agency can earn its fee. If the message is already clear and the team needs 20 hooks, six aspect ratios, three creator personas, and weekly refreshes, a production system is often a better fit than a high-concept shop. If attribution, media planning, and creative testing need to work together, an integrated performance agency is usually stronger than a pure production partner.

That distinction matters more now because AI has moved from side experiment to part of the workflow for many marketing teams, as noted earlier. Agencies still matter. The work they should own is changing. Strong partners now need a clear answer to a simple question: what do they do better than an internal team using AI tools for versioning, localization, and iteration?

For many brands, the best setup is hybrid. Keep strategic positioning, major campaign concepts, and channel-specific creative direction with the agency. Handle faster-turn work internally or through AI tools. That includes cutdowns, hook testing, language variants, creator avatar tests, and routine refreshes to fight fatigue. This setup lowers production drag without forcing one partner to cover every need.

Here’s the RFP filter I use before signing anything:

Ask about delivery cadence: How many new concepts, variants, and revisions ship each month? Ask for a sample month, not a promise.
Ask how learnings feed the work: Who reviews performance data, and how fast does that change scripts, hooks, and edits?
Ask about asset economics: Can they turn one shoot into paid social cutdowns, statics, vertical edits, and creator-style versions, or does every request become a new project?
Ask where they are strong: TikTok, Meta, YouTube, CTV, LinkedIn, and app UA each demand different instincts. Broad capability claims are cheap. Ask for examples tied to your channel mix.
Ask about approvals and turnaround: Who on their side owns feedback, how many rounds are included, and what happens when the team needs a revision in 48 hours?
Ask what should stay in-house: Good partners protect your budget. They should point out work your team or platform stack can handle faster and cheaper.

I also look for one hard thing in every pitch: trade-off awareness. A premium creative shop may give the brand a sharper point of view, but it can struggle with the volume needed for paid social testing. A UGC network can produce volume quickly, but quality control and strategic consistency may vary by creator. An AI creative platform can cut cost and turnaround, but it still needs a team that can write briefs, judge creative, and make decisions quickly.

Fit decides the outcome. Brand launch, B2B product education, app user acquisition, always-on DTC testing, and CTV expansion should not be staffed the same way.

If you’re still comparing options beyond this list, this expert roundup of growth agencies is a useful additional reference.

The goal is not to find the best agency in the abstract. The goal is to build a creative system that keeps learning, shipping, and adapting as channels and economics change.

If your team is stuck between hiring another agency and building creative capacity in-house, AdCrafty is worth a serious look. It gives DTC, e-commerce, SaaS, app, and agency teams a faster way to generate UGC-style ads, test new hooks and avatars, localize creative, and keep iteration moving without the delays and cost of traditional shoots. For brands dealing with ad fatigue, that can be the missing layer between strategy and output.