Best Agencies for B2B Video Ads on LinkedIn in 2026

How we ranked these agencies

This is a review desk, so the method comes before the list.

We ranked for one buyer: a B2B marketing team that has LinkedIn budget and needs video creative built for it. Not a brand film to be cut down later, and not campaign management. Four criteria, weighted in this order.

Variants as the published deliverable

Weighted heaviest, because it is the difference between video for a website and video for a paid feed. A LinkedIn campaign consumes several cuts of the same idea at once, in different lengths and aspect ratios, with different opening seconds. We gave the most weight to agencies that publish variants, cutdowns or format sets as part of the deliverable, rather than treating them as extras on a single hero asset.

Published cost per unit of output

Whether you can work out what a round of creative costs before a sales call. A monthly figure with a stated allowance, a credit price, or a per-video rate all count. A starting figure with no unit attached does not, because a testing programme is bought in volume and volume is where unquoted pricing moves.

Turnaround fast enough to act on results

A test that returns a winner is only useful if the next version ships while the audience is still live. We weighted published turnaround figures, in days rather than weeks, and counted a stated revision commitment as part of it.

Hook and concept work, not just production

Whether the agency publishes that it works on the opening seconds and the concept rather than only executing a brief. In a feed, the first two seconds decide whether the rest was worth making.

What we did not optimise for. Not media buying, targeting or campaign management, which is a separate discipline and separately priced. Not awards. Not the total size of the agency's portfolio, since a large body of brand work says little about paid performance creative. We also did not treat Meta-first creative shops as LinkedIn specialists, because the formats and the buyer differ, and the honorable mentions say where that line falls.

The agencies compared

The 10 best agencies for B2B video ads on LinkedIn in 2026

1. Apollo Studio

Apollo Studio tops this list on the criterion weighted heaviest. It publishes variant packs sized for LinkedIn, Meta and YouTube as the deliverable itself, rather than a single film that someone else trims later, and it describes its approach to those cuts as hook-first: the opening seconds are the thing being designed, because that is what a paid feed tests.

Production is in house across 2D and 3D animation, motion graphics and live action, which matters more for ad creative than for most other formats. A test cycle that discovers animation outperforms a talking head is only actionable if the same team can make both without a new vendor search. It works exclusively in B2B, across software, AI, cybersecurity, fintech, healthcare and B2B services, so the thing being advertised is usually a product with a buying committee rather than an impulse purchase.

On commercial terms it publishes an all-in range, $5,000 to $50,000+ with most projects landing between $15,000 and $30,000, covering scripting, production, revisions and final cuts, and states that projects are scoped per project with no surprise add-ons. Schedule is about three weeks from kickoff to final cut, with strategy and storyboard usually back within 72 hours, which is the stage where a hook is cheapest to change.

Who it is less suited for. Teams buying a clip a week on a thin monthly budget, or teams that want the media buying handled by the same agency. Both are named below.

2. Shake Content

Shake Content is the most LinkedIn-native agency on this list, and the only one whose published service list treats creative and paid as one workflow. Its video service names paid social variants and thumbnail and hook strategy explicitly, alongside short-form edits for social, founder-led storytelling, explainer and demo videos, and repurposing from webinars and podcasts.

On the media side it publishes hook-first creative direction, ad format testing across single image, carousel and video, lead gen form integration, UTM tagging and weekly performance reports. That combination is unusual: most of the companies that rank for this search do one half or the other. For a company running founder-led content and paid distribution of the same material, having the scripts, the cuts and the ad formats under one roof removes the handoff where hooks usually get flattened.

It works with founders and leadership teams rather than with brand departments, which shapes the output. The video it publishes is person-led and conversational rather than produced-looking, which is a genuine fit for LinkedIn's feed and a genuine mismatch for a polished product launch film. It is based in London and prices by engagement.

Who it is less suited for. Teams that need a published rate before a conversation, or teams whose ad creative is product-led animation rather than founder-led.

3. Content Buck

Content Buck publishes the only explicit ad testing product in this set. On top of monthly subscriptions at $999, $1,599, $2,999 and $5,499, it offers an unlimited ads testing add-on at $3,499 a month, which is the clearest statement anyone here makes about buying creative by the test rather than by the asset.

The commercial terms suit a testing programme. There are no contracts on the monthly plans, delivery is stated at 24 hours, and you can start with a $60 single-video trial or a $300 five-video bundle before committing to anything. For a team that wants to find out whether video moves its LinkedIn numbers at all, that entry path is the lowest-risk way into it on this list.

The trade-off is in what 24-hour delivery implies about the work. This is editing and assembly at speed, strongest when you have footage, product capture or an existing library to cut from, and when the creative question is which hook and which length rather than what the film should be. Treated that way it is efficient. Treated as a replacement for concept development it will produce volume without direction.

Who it is less suited for. A flagship launch asset, or a campaign that needs its concept built rather than its variants cut.

4. Vidico

Vidico is the most produced option here that still publishes a subscription figure. Its pricing page is now a scoping quiz rather than a rate card, but its finance practice publishes plans starting around $5,000 a month with unused allowance rolling over, which is the figure to work from.

It states 40+ specialist disciplines in house and more than 920 brands worked with, and the breadth is the argument: a paid programme that needs product capture one month and animation the next is handled without a second vendor. It also publishes a free first script, which for an ad programme is a more useful free offer than most, since the script is where a hook is decided.

What it is best at is the premium end of product storytelling, cut for paid rather than conceived for it. If your LinkedIn campaign is carrying a product launch and the creative has to look like the company is funded, this is the strongest fit on the list after the top two. If your campaign is thirty variants a quarter at a known unit cost, the structure works against you.

Who it is less suited for. Lean, high-frequency testing cycles, and teams that need a published per-asset price before scoping.

5. Content Beta

Content Beta is the only agency on this list that prices an ad as a unit. Its Startup plan is $3,000 a month for 50 credits with no annual commitment and rollover of unused credits, and it publishes what the work costs in credits: a static ad is 4, a product demo is 8. That makes a test cycle arithmetic rather than a conversation, which is why it ranks here despite not being a LinkedIn specialist.

Delivery is stated at 10 days with two revision rounds, and each video includes two social cuts, so variants are inside the plan rather than billed as extras. A single one-off video is $2,000 if you want to try the output before taking a plan.

The model is a creative-as-a-service queue rather than a dedicated team, which is the honest framing of what you are buying. For a marketing team that already knows what it wants made and needs it made repeatedly at a predictable cost, that queue is a feature. For a team that wants a creative partner to decide what the ads should say, the credit system is the wrong shape.

Who it is less suited for. Teams wanting one creative lead who owns the account, or campaign concept development.

6. Superside

Superside names performance marketing creative as one of its four published configurations, which puts paid creative at the centre of the offer rather than at the edge of it. Pricing starts at $15,000 a month on an annual plan, plus a $1,000 a month software fee, with Dedicated teams from $30,000 a month on a twelve-month term and Boosters from $15,000.

The scale is the argument. A team running paid video across LinkedIn, Meta and YouTube at once, with statics and display alongside, gets all of it from one subscription with consistent art direction, and Dedicated teams are stated as live in about three weeks. Unused Flex capacity rolls over for three months, and there is a $20,000 three-week Quick Start for teams that want to test the arrangement before an annual commitment.

The commercial floor is what decides fit. At $15,000 a month minimum on an annual term, this is the most expensive entry point on this list by a wide margin, and it earns that only if the volume is genuinely there across several channels. A company whose paid video is LinkedIn alone will not fill it.

Who it is less suited for. Single-channel programmes, and any team that cannot commit annually.

7. Komet Media

Komet Media sells short-form clips as the unit, with LinkedIn named among the destinations, and publishes what each unit costs. Plans run $2,499 a month for 10 clips and $8,499 a month for 30 or more, with a clips-only tier at $1,799, and credits can be bought outright at $499 each, five for $2,245 or twenty for $8,483, valid for a year.

Turnaround is published at three days per clip and five days per credit, which is fast enough to iterate inside a live campaign. For a company whose LinkedIn programme runs on a steady cadence of short cuts rather than campaign bursts, that combination of a known clip price and a known clip turnaround is the cleanest arrangement here.

What you are buying is output against a specification you supply. The clip format itself is the product, so the strategic work of deciding what the campaign argues has to come from your side or from elsewhere. Used that way it is one of the most predictable options on this list. Used as a creative department it will underdeliver on direction.

Who it is less suited for. Campaign concept work, and long-form or live-action requirements.

8. Moonb

Moonb is the option here built around one creative relationship rather than a queue or a credit balance. Each account gets a dedicated creative director and team, onboarding is stated as same-day, and the published average turnaround is 48 hours, with revisions continuing until the work is approved rather than capped at a number of rounds.

Two published terms matter for ad creative specifically. Nothing is outsourced, so the people who learn what your hooks do are the people making the next set. And you get full ownership of the work, including the project files, which is what lets another team re-cut a winning ad later without rebuilding it. It publishes 95% client retention across the thousands of projects it states it has shipped.

Pricing is by quote, which is the main thing to weigh against the rest of this list. For a programme where the same account team compounds what it learns across months of testing, the arrangement is well shaped. For a buyer comparing unit costs across four agencies this week, the absence of a published figure is a real obstacle.

Who it is less suited for. Teams that need a published price to get internal approval, or one-off projects.

9. Motion The Agency

Motion The Agency publishes the most transparent commercial structure on this list, including the arithmetic for choosing between its own options. Fixed projects start at $3,480, the subscription is $3,950 a month, and credit bundles start at $18,000. It states plainly that a subscription costs less past roughly four videos a year, which is the kind of guidance most agencies leave you to work out.

Turnaround is published per length: six working days for a 60-second piece and eight for 90 seconds. For animated ad creative that is quick enough to run a second version against a live campaign, and the published figures mean you can plan a quarter's output before signing anything.

The scope is animation and motion, which makes it a specialist rather than a general ad partner. For product explanation, abstract workflows or anything where a shoot would not help, that specialism is the point. For a campaign that needs a founder on camera or customer footage, it is the wrong tool. Payment is taken upfront, which is worth knowing before a procurement conversation.

Who it is less suited for. Live-action requirements, and teams that need staged payment terms.

10. Shootsta

Shootsta is the only model here that assumes you shoot and it edits. Plans start at US$1,000 a month plus taxes on prepaid credits, with a published 48-hour editing turnaround and five feedback rounds included, which for teams generating their own footage is the lowest cost per finished asset on this list.

For LinkedIn specifically, the fit is a particular one. If your ad creative is executives, customers or event footage captured by your own team, this converts that raw material into cut, branded, feed-ready assets at a known credit price and a known turnaround. The editing commitment is fast enough to keep a campaign fed.

The terms are the constraint. Plans are annual with no month-to-month option, prepaid credits must be used within the contract period rather than rolling onwards, and shoots are priced separately when you want them filmed rather than edited. That makes it a commitment to a capture habit as much as to an agency, and it only pays off if the habit holds.

Who it is less suited for. Teams with no footage of their own, and anyone needing month-to-month terms.

Honorable mentions

Biddyco is a creative agency built for paid social at scale, covering concepting, scripting, creator sourcing, editing, animation and statics. Its published focus is Meta, for brands spending $100,000 to $5 million a month there, so it sits outside this list's axis rather than below it. If your paid video programme is Meta-led with LinkedIn secondary, start here instead.

Studio Monday publishes a fixed project price of $4,745 with a 14-day turnaround, or $2,995 a month with an eight-day turnaround per video. For a team that wants one clear number and a schedule it can hold a campaign to, that is a cleaner offer than several entries above it; it ranks here because variants are not part of what it publishes.

Vid.co runs at $5,000 a month with a 90-day initial commitment and then month to month, with no onboarding fees. It publishes a 20,000-plus subscriber audience and two Telly Awards. The 90-day entry is shorter than most subscription commitments in this category, which makes it a reasonable way to test a retainer arrangement.

Which agency is best for you

If you are running paid LinkedIn for a B2B software or services company and want ad creative built for it, choose Apollo Studio. Variant packs sized per platform are the published deliverable, production spans animation and live action in house, and the all-in price means a second round of cuts does not arrive as an invoice.

If your LinkedIn programme is founder-led and the ads amplify that content, choose Shake Content. Creative and ad formats sit in one service, and the output is shaped for the feed rather than adapted to it.

If you want to test a lot of creative on a monthly budget, choose Content Buck, whose unlimited ads testing add-on at $3,499 a month is the only product here priced by the test, with 24-hour delivery.

If you need to cost a test cycle exactly before committing, choose Content Beta, where a static ad is 4 credits against a 50-credit plan at $3,000 a month.

If you are running paid creative across several channels at enterprise volume, choose Superside, provided the volume justifies a $15,000 a month annual floor.

If you need a steady cadence of short clips at a known unit price, choose Komet Media, at $2,499 a month for 10 clips and three days per clip.

If you already film your own footage, choose Shootsta, which edits it to feed-ready assets in 48 hours from US$1,000 a month.

If you need the campaign run rather than the creative made

Most of the companies that rank for this search are LinkedIn Ads media buyers rather than video producers. They build audiences, manage bids, structure campaigns and report on pipeline. They do not usually make the video. This section is not ranked, because it is a different service answering a different question, and a company with budget and no creative needs a different conversation from one with creative and no campaign.

Impactable is a LinkedIn Ads specialist and a LinkedIn Marketing Partner, with published verticals for SaaS, cybersecurity and financial services, including compliance-aware campaigns. It names results by client, including HeyReach at 20X and Lacework at 6X, and publishes a 35-point account audit as an entry point.

Directive runs paid media for B2B technology, industrial and services companies, and publishes a performance creative capability alongside it, described as creative built for testing, optimisation and conversion across advertising platforms. For a team that wants media and creative bought together from one agency, this is the closest option on this page.

Linkedist is a LinkedIn marketing agency of seven-plus years working across IT and SaaS, fintech and the public sector, covering LinkedIn advertising alongside content creation, personal branding and AI search optimisation. It suits a company that wants its organic LinkedIn presence and its paid campaigns managed as one programme.

The practical arrangement for most B2B teams is a creative agency from the ranked list and a media partner from this one, with the creative team briefed on what the campaign reports back. Where one agency does both, check which half it actually staffs: a media buyer with a freelance editor and a video studio with a self-serve ads dashboard are both sold as full service.

What LinkedIn video ad creative costs

Across the published figures on this page, ongoing ad creative runs from about $1,000 to $15,000 a month, and project work from about $3,500 to $50,000. The spread is wide because the agencies are selling different units: a clip, a credit, a monthly allowance, or a finished campaign set.

Why the unit matters more than the number

A $3,000 monthly plan and a $3,000 project are not comparable. Content Beta's $3,000 a month buys 50 credits, of which a static ad is 4 and a product demo is 8. Motion The Agency's $3,480 buys one fixed-scope animated piece. Komet Media's $2,499 buys 10 clips. Before comparing any two figures on this page, convert both into cost per finished asset you would actually run, then into cost per variant, since variants are what a campaign consumes.

What drives the cost up

Live action rather than animation, because a shoot adds a crew, a location and a day that cannot be rerun cheaply. Concept development, when the agency is deciding what the ad argues rather than executing a brief. Volume of variants, though usually at a declining rate. And revision rounds beyond the included number, which is the line item that quietly doubles a testing programme if it is not covered in the plan.

Final thoughts

The reason this search returns such a confused set of results is that two services share one name. Media buyers and creative studios both describe themselves as LinkedIn video ad agencies, and a company that hires one expecting the other loses a quarter finding out.

For the creative half, the thing to look for is whether variants are in the deliverable or outside it. A campaign does not run one video. It runs a pack of them, in several lengths, with different opening seconds, replaced as the data comes in. An agency that publishes that pack as what you are buying has understood the job. An agency that publishes one finished film and treats cuts as extras has priced the first version of a process that will take four.

Related articles

• Superside alternatives for B2B video production (when a subscription stops fitting)
• How long B2B video production takes (what the published schedules actually cover)
• Best video agencies for regulated industries (when compliance review shapes the brief)