Structured review

Weak — 2 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 20% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 42 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 7 · Adequate 30 · Weak 5. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and 37 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: How many assets does this vendor actually ship per client per month, and how fast is a variant round? A stated, specific throughput (e.g. Where the vendor names a client, check the client's live ads in the Meta Ad Library — POSITIVE EVIDENCE ONLY, and scope it properly. Correct procedure: run the keyword search, harvest the advertiser's page_id from the rendered HTML, then re-query with view_all_page_id=<id>. Scoped counts are 100% brand-attributed; keyword counts are not scoped to the advertiser and overstated by 41% in one measured case (HexClad, 410 keyword vs 290 scoped), while a search for a generically-named client returned 1,400 results consisting of Viator, Klook and Tripadvisor. A high-volume, recent, scoped result confirms a real programme and may raise this score. A low or absent result is INCONCLUSIVE and must never lower it. Critically: NEVER record an absence from a page ID you did not harvest from a live ad — the userID shown on a logged-out Facebook page is not the Ad Library page_id, and querying it returns a clean, convincing zero. That was proven by control on 2026-08-11 against a brand known to be running 290 ads. Absence of ads is never scored against an agency. See library/_notes/meta_ad_library_method_2026-08-11.json.

Scores high — 'X assets/month', published turnaround of 24-72h per round) with corroboration scores 4-5.

Scores low — Vague 'unlimited requests' claims with a one-at-a-time queue score 2-3 — unlimited requests with a single concurrent slot is a throughput of one. No stated volume anywhere scores 2.

What we found — No throughput figure appears anywhere on the site. The Creative service page lists deliverables (ad creative for Meta, TikTok, Google, YouTube; email, SMS and landing page design) but no assets per month; the UGC page describes a four-stage pipeline and a starting price but no video count; the Paid Media page itemises creative deliverables with no volume attached. No turnaround time is published for a variant round on any page. The Dollar Shave Club case study says creative output was increased but gives no number of assets. Rubric: no stated volume anywhere scores 2. A Meta Ad Library check on a named client was attempted and the Ad Library returned HTTP 403 to a plain fetch, so no scoped ad count could be harvested; that is a broken instrument and is recorded as inconclusive, not as an absence, and it does not lower this score. That is what the low band describes, which is why it scored Weak.

On the record — “The Creative service page names deliverables (ad creative for Meta, TikTok, Google, YouTube; email, SMS and landing page design; cross-channel creative roadmaps) but publishes no monthly asset volume, no turnaround time, no pricing, no brand-guideline intake or QC step, and no file-ownership terms.” structured.agency ↗

On the record — “The UGC service page publishes a starting price of $4,000 and grants 'full, unrestricted rights to every asset. Run it across paid, organic, and any channel you need. No limits.'” structured.agency ↗

deliverability — deliverability: whether cold email actually lands in the inbox rather than spam. The tell is infrastructure talk — warmed sending domains kept separate from your main domain — because a burned domain outlasts the engagement.

UGC — user-generated-content style ads: creative shot to look like a customer’s own phone video rather than a produced commercial.

pipeline — the dollar value of open, qualified deals sales is working. “Pipeline created” ties marketing to money, where lead counts don’t.

Evidence: inferred — our reading of indirect evidence, not a documented fact.

Stronger here: New Engen scores Strong on the same dimension.

Adequate — 3 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 20% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 42 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 5 · Adequate 19 · Weak 18. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and 5 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Does the vendor work from the client's brand system — logo lockups and clear space, exact colour and type, tone of voice — or from a mood board and taste? Look for an explicit intake of brand guidelines, a named check step before client review, and any statement about who catches an off-brand asset.

Scores high — A documented preflight or QC step scores 4-5.

Scores low — 'We'll learn your brand over the first month' scores 2-3. Rotating contractor pools with no guideline intake score 1-2. Silence on the question scores 2: at volume, brand drift is the default outcome and a vendor that has not thought about it has not solved it.

What we found — No brand-guideline intake and no named preflight or QC step are published on any page read. What is published sits in the middle band: an in-house department rather than a contractor pool (the team page names an Associate Creative Director, a Design Team Lead, four graphic designers, a Static Designer and Video Editor, a Lead Video Editor and a Creative Production Project Manager), a stated client edit gate in the UGC pipeline ('Edits from creative strategy professionals and client'), and an FAQ commitment that a client is 'assigned the same copywriters and designer across all service lines.' The Paid Media page claims 'creative that feels on-brand and authentic' but names no mechanism that catches an off-brand asset. Continuity of named staff is the reason this is not scored at silence; the absence of any guideline intake is the reason it is not higher. That is between the two bands, which is why it scored Adequate.

On the record — “The team page names an in-house creative staff by role, including an Associate Creative Director, a Design Team Lead, four graphic designers, a Static Designer and Video Editor, a Lead Video Editor, a Creative Production Project Manager and two copywriters.” structured.agency ↗

On the record — “The FAQ publishes contract terms: 'Our default contract terms are 60 days when you sign and move to month-to-month after that initial period.' It also states a client is 'assigned the same copywriters and designer across all service lines', and a qualification floor of $150k or more in monthly business revenue.” structured.agency ↗

UGC — user-generated-content style ads: creative shot to look like a customer’s own phone video rather than a produced commercial.

pipeline — the dollar value of open, qualified deals sales is working. “Pipeline created” ties marketing to money, where lead counts don’t.

Evidence: vendor stated — the agency’s own claim, recorded as theirs rather than ours.

Adequate — 3 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 42 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 13 · Adequate 29. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and 13 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Can one approved concept become 100+ assets across aspect ratios, placements, languages and markets? Resizing only, single language, scores 3. Distinguish genuine transcreation (copy reworked for a market) from machine translation dropped into a template; the latter is not localization capacity and should be scored as resizing.

Scores high — Named format/placement coverage plus real multi-market or multi-language delivery scores 4-5.

Scores low — 'We make ten great ads' scores 2 — excellent and out of category.

What we found — Format and placement coverage is named and the variation method is published in detail. The Paid Media deliverables list includes 'Platform-Optimized Formatting' and 'UGC Hook Testing & Mashups'; a blog post dated 2026-01-31 sets out a '3-change rule' (refresh copy or headline, change the background asset, change one additional visual element) for every iteration; a second post prescribes 3-6 variations per ad-set theory and 'spreading winners across new formats.' That is more than resizing. But nothing on the site references a second language, a second market, transcreation or regional adaptation, and the eight niches listed in the footer are all US DTC categories. Rubric: single language and format work scores 3. That is between the two bands, which is why it scored Adequate.

On the record — “The Paid Media service page publishes 'Pricing starting at $6,500 plus % of spend' and itemises creative deliverables including 'Creative Iteration Based on Test Results', 'Post-Production Creative Editing', 'Platform-Optimized Formatting' and 'UGC Hook Testing & Mashups', alongside a cadence of weekly recaps, monthly reporting, bi-weekly strategy meetings and quarterly business reviews.” structured.agency ↗

deliverability — deliverability: whether cold email actually lands in the inbox rather than spam. The tell is infrastructure talk — warmed sending domains kept separate from your main domain — because a burned domain outlasts the engagement.

UGC — user-generated-content style ads: creative shot to look like a customer’s own phone video rather than a produced commercial.

DTC — direct-to-consumer: brands selling on their own site rather than through retailers.

Evidence: partly checkable — corroborated in part against the sources below; the remainder rests on the agency’s own account.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 42 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 2 · Strong 32 · Adequate 7 · Weak 1. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 2 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Does anyone on this vendor's team read the ad account? Look for a stated feedback loop: winners scaled, losers cut, next round briefed off results. Iteration on client-relayed feedback only scores 3.

Scores high — Access to platform performance data plus a named cadence scores 4-5.

Scores low — Ship-and-stop production, where the vendor delivers files and never learns what happened, scores 1-2 — this is the most common failure in the design-subscription tier and it is what separates production from performance creative.

What we found — This vendor buys the media itself, so it holds the ad account rather than waiting for relayed feedback. The Paid Media deliverables list includes 'Creative Iteration Based on Test Results' and a named reporting cadence (weekly recaps, monthly reporting, bi-weekly strategy meetings, quarterly business reviews). A published blog post sets out the actual decision rules: pause any ad that spends 2-3x target CAC without a purchase, sort active testing ads by spend daily against a last-7-days lookback, move any ad past 50 conversions at target KPI into a scaling campaign using Post IDs, iterate each winner, study each loser. The Dollar Shave Club case study describes finding video winners and building new versions of them, with a stated outcome of 140% more bottom-of-funnel video spend at 8% lower CAC. Held at Strong rather than Excellent because the loop is described by the vendor and the only independent review base read reports two clients rating the paid media work 0.5-1.0. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.

On the record — “A published blog post states specific creative-testing decision rules: 3-6 variations per ad-set theory, pause any ad spending 2-3x target CAC without a purchase, sort active testing ads by spend daily against a last-7-days lookback, and move any ad past 50 conversions at target KPI into a scaling campaign using Post IDs before iterating on it.” structured.agency ↗

On the record — “The Paid Media service page publishes 'Pricing starting at $6,500 plus % of spend' and itemises creative deliverables including 'Creative Iteration Based on Test Results', 'Post-Production Creative Editing', 'Platform-Optimized Formatting' and 'UGC Hook Testing & Mashups', alongside a cadence of weekly recaps, monthly reporting, bi-weekly strategy meetings and quarterly business reviews.” structured.agency ↗

deliverability — deliverability: whether cold email actually lands in the inbox rather than spam. The tell is infrastructure talk — warmed sending domains kept separate from your main domain — because a burned domain outlasts the engagement.

CAC — customer acquisition cost: total sales and marketing spend divided by customers won — the number that says whether growth is affordable.

funnel — the path from stranger to customer — awareness at the top, purchase at the bottom. “Full-funnel” means owning the whole path, not one stage.

Evidence: partly checkable — corroborated in part against the sources below; the remainder rests on the agency’s own account.

Adequate — 3 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 10% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 42 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 11 · Adequate 19 · Weak 12. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and 11 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Legal disclaimers, claim substantiation, platform specs and safe zones, accessibility contrast, rights and licensing on music/footage/creator content. Platform-spec competence only scores 3. Do not fail a small shop for lacking pharma review workflows it was never asked for.

Scores high — Explicit process, or regulated-category experience (health, finance, alcohol, children's), scores 4-5.

Scores low — No evidence either way scores 2 with LOW confidence rather than a penalty — most SMB-facing shops never discuss this publicly, and absence here is weaker evidence than absence on volume or ownership.

What we found — Platform-spec competence is evidenced (platform-optimized formatting, detailed public writing on Meta campaign structure and TikTok GMV Max mechanics), and creator-content rights are addressed explicitly on the UGC page. Nothing was found on legal disclaimers, claim substantiation, safe zones, accessibility contrast, or music and stock footage licensing, despite case studies in supplements, health and wellness and beauty where claim substantiation is a live risk. Rubric: platform-spec competence only scores 3. Confidence on this dimension is LOW - most shops of this size never discuss compliance publicly and the absence is weaker evidence here than elsewhere. That is between the two bands, which is why it scored Adequate.

UGC — user-generated-content style ads: creative shot to look like a customer’s own phone video rather than a produced commercial.

Evidence: inferred — our reading of indirect evidence, not a documented fact.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 10% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 42 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 2 · Adequate 24 · Weak 15 · Poor 1. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Who owns the output — final files, source/working files, raw footage, and the rights to creator content? Documented designer discontinuity in independent reviews is a verified Poor, not an inference.

Scores high — Explicit transfer of source files and full usage rights scores 4-5.

Scores low — Finals only, working files withheld, scores 2. Silence scores 2; at this price point silence usually resolves against the buyer. Separately, continuity: the same named designers month to month scores 4-5, a rotating pool with no continuity guarantee scores 1-2.

What we found — Rights on creator content are stated without hedging: the UGC page reads 'Get full, unrestricted rights to every asset. Run it across paid, organic, and any channel you need. No limits.' That covers the term normally most contested at this price point. Continuity is separately addressed: the FAQ states a client is assigned the same copywriters and designer across service lines, the team page lists the creative staff by name and role, and the independently read Clutch profile corroborates that fixed teams of two to five people are assigned. Not scored higher because the site is silent on source and working files - the layered design files, project files and raw footage behind the finals are never mentioned, so a buyer cannot tell whether the transfer covers anything beyond delivered assets. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.

On the record — “The UGC service page publishes a starting price of $4,000 and grants 'full, unrestricted rights to every asset. Run it across paid, organic, and any channel you need. No limits.'” structured.agency ↗

On the record — “The team page names an in-house creative staff by role, including an Associate Creative Director, a Design Team Lead, four graphic designers, a Static Designer and Video Editor, a Lead Video Editor, a Creative Production Project Manager and two copywriters.” structured.agency ↗

UGC — user-generated-content style ads: creative shot to look like a customer’s own phone video rather than a produced commercial.

Evidence: partly checkable — corroborated in part against the sources below; the remainder rests on the agency’s own account.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 10% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 42 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 1 · Strong 8 · Adequate 7 · Weak 26. The typical agency here scores Weak, and 1 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Published tiers with an unstated volume ceiling score 3. Note any minimum spend, and note whether pausing is permitted, since seasonal advertisers pause.

Scores high — Published per-asset, per-month or per-round pricing scores 4-5. Month-to-month or per-project scores 4-5.

Scores low — Bespoke-only quoting with no public anchor scores 1-2. Twelve-month lock-in on a production service scores 2 — production is inherently variable in volume and a long lock is a transfer of that risk to the buyer.

What we found — Two public price anchors are published on the vendor's own service pages: 'Pricing starting at $4,000' on the UGC page and 'Pricing starting at $6,500 plus % of spend' on the Paid Media page. Contract terms are published in the FAQ rather than left to the call: 'Our default contract terms are 60 days when you sign and move to month-to-month after that initial period' - a 60-day initial term with no annual lock, which is the buyer-favourable end of the rubric. The independently read Clutch profile lists a $1,000+ minimum project size and a $100-149 hourly band. Held at Strong because no volume ceiling attaches to either price (what $4,000 buys in videos is not stated), the Creative service page itself carries no price at all, no per-asset or per-round rate is published, and nothing states whether a seasonal advertiser may pause. A separate qualification floor of $150k monthly revenue is published in the FAQ. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.

On the record — “The FAQ publishes contract terms: 'Our default contract terms are 60 days when you sign and move to month-to-month after that initial period.' It also states a client is 'assigned the same copywriters and designer across all service lines', and a qualification floor of $150k or more in monthly business revenue.” structured.agency ↗

On the record — “The UGC service page publishes a starting price of $4,000 and grants 'full, unrestricted rights to every asset. Run it across paid, organic, and any channel you need. No limits.'” structured.agency ↗

UGC — user-generated-content style ads: creative shot to look like a customer’s own phone video rather than a produced commercial.

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.