ChatGPT answers, unedited

If you’re building this for an agency managing multiple clients, I’d narrow the field to Smartly vs. Marpipe vs. a lighter creative-intelligence tool.

My recommendation: Smartly

For an agency-level operation, Smartly is probably the strongest overall platform if your goal is:

• Multiple client accounts/workspaces
• Centralized creative asset management
• Versioning hundreds of ads from master concepts/templates
• Client-specific brand controls and approvals
• Automated production across formats, placements, languages, etc.
• Creative testing + performance reporting
• Connecting creative production directly to media activation
• Eventually managing Meta + TikTok + Pinterest + other channels from one system

Smartly explicitly supports agency teams and multi-account workflows, including creative production, versioning, campaign management, reporting, and creative insights. Smartly Smartly

Its current creative product also supports dynamic templates, asset-level insights, automated testing, personalization, and centralized creative feedback/versioning. Smartly Smartly

smartly.io

But there's an important distinction

If by "creative testing" you primarily mean:

"Give me a rigorous system that tells me which creative concept, image, hook, headline, CTA, etc. actually caused the performance difference across my clients."

Then I'd look much harder at Marpipe.

Marpipe is specifically designed around multivariate creative testing: it decomposes ads into variables and reports performance at the asset/element level rather than simply telling you that Ad A beat Ad B. Marpipe Marpipe

marpipe.com

So I would think about the decision this way:

There are also newer dedicated testing platforms. A 2026 comparison, for example, puts Framework toward the statistical testing/production end, Smartly toward enterprise creative automation, and tools like Motion toward post-launch creative analysis. NewForm NewForm

What I'd do if this were my agency

I wouldn't buy based on the demo's "AI creative" capabilities. That's becoming table stakes.

I'd design the evaluation around this workflow:

Client → Brand workspace → Creative concepts → Master asset → Variations → Approval → Launch → Test → Winner → Learning → New version

And I'd require the platform to answer:

1. Who owns each asset?
2. What is the parent/master creative?
3. What changed between V1, V2, V3?
4. Which client/account/campaign used each version?
5. What was the hypothesis behind the test?
6. What variables were actually being tested?
7. Which version won, with what confidence?
8. What creative attributes correlate with performance?
9. Can we automatically create the next iteration from the winner?
10. Can a client see only their own assets/data?
11. Can we report learnings across clients without leaking client data?
12. Can we export the creative-learning history when a client leaves?

That last group is where I'd expect a lot of "creative platforms" to fall apart.

The architecture I'd favor

If you're a serious performance agency, my preferred stack would actually be:

Smartly = production/versioning/activation
Marpipe or dedicated testing layer = rigorous experimentation
Your BI/data warehouse = agency-level learning repository

Rather than trying to force one platform to be your entire creative operating system.

If you tell me roughly how many clients you have, monthly ad spend, number of creatives/versions per client, and whether you're mainly Meta/TikTok or multi-channel, I can give you a much more specific Smartly vs Marpipe vs Motion vs Foreplay vs a custom stack recommendation, including what I'd buy and what I'd avoid.

So I would think about the decision this way:

There are also newer dedicated testing platforms. A 2026 comparison, for example, puts Framework toward the statistical testing/production end, Smartly toward enterprise creative automation, and tools like Motion toward post-launch creative analysis.

What I'd do if this were my agency

I wouldn't buy based on the demo's "AI creative" capabilities. That's becoming table stakes.

I'd design the evaluation around this workflow:

If you're an agency managing creative testing + versioning across multiple clients, I’d shortlist Celtra, Smartly, and Marpipe—but my default recommendation would be Celtra if the core problem is creative operations at agency scale, and Marpipe if the core problem is rigorous testing/learning.

For an agency, I'd lean Celtra

The important distinction is "creative testing platform" vs. "creative operating system."

If you have, say, 20–100 clients and each client has:

• multiple brands/products
• different brand guidelines
• dozens/hundreds of creative concepts
• multiple aspect ratios
• localized variants
• Meta/TikTok/YouTube/display versions
• client approval workflows
• version history
• performance data attached to assets
• recurring testing cycles

then you don't just need an A/B testing tool. You need centralized creative production, templating, permissions, versioning, governance, activation and performance feedback.

That's where Celtra is particularly compelling. Its current platform is explicitly built around modular creative production, automatically adapting approved concepts across placements, audiences and markets, while connecting production, approval, activation and performance intelligence. celtra.com

When I'd choose Smartly instead

Choose Smartly if your agency's biggest pain is:

"We have tons of creative, but getting all those variants launched and managed across paid social accounts is killing us."

Smartly is particularly strong when creative operations and media execution need to be tightly integrated across Meta, TikTok, Pinterest, Snap, etc. Independent 2026 comparisons also characterize it as the stronger choice for very large advertisers needing industrial-scale creative automation and cross-channel publishing. www.newform.com

I'd favor it for an agency with very high media spend and sophisticated paid-media operations, rather than an agency whose differentiator is creative strategy/testing.

When I'd choose Marpipe

If what you really want is:

"Give me a statistically disciplined system for figuring out which creative variables actually drive performance across my clients."

then I'd look hard at Marpipe.

It's much more focused on experimentation and variable-level creative testing than being a giant creative-operations suite. That's valuable because agencies can build a repeatable testing methodology rather than simply producing more variants.

The tradeoff is that you'll probably need other systems around it for the broader creative lifecycle.

The architecture I'd actually consider

For an agency, I'd think about the stack as:

Creative repository → modular templates → versioning → client approval → test generation → ad activation → performance data → learnings → next creative brief

The winning platform is the one that lets you close that loop.

I'd therefore rank them:

1. Celtra — if you want one agency-wide creative infrastructure
2. Smartly — if paid-media execution is equally important
3. Marpipe — if testing methodology is the primary differentiator

One important caveat: pricing is enterprise/custom for Celtra, so you should evaluate the economics based on number of clients, assets, variants, channels and monthly production volume, rather than seats alone. celtra.com

If you tell me (1) number of clients, (2) monthly ad spend you manage, (3) Meta-only vs Meta/TikTok/Google, (4) roughly how many creatives/variants you produce per client/month, and (5) whether clients need to log in for approvals, I can give you a much more definitive Celtra vs Smartly vs Marpipe recommendation, including the operating model I'd use for the agency.

If you’re building this for an agency managing multiple clients, I’d shortlist Smartly, Celtra, and Motion—but my default recommendation would be Smartly if you want one operating layer for creative production + testing + media execution.

My ranking

🥇 I’d choose Smartly for your use case

smartly.io is particularly compelling if your agency needs to manage many clients, ad accounts, creatives and variations from a centralized workflow.

Smartly supports agencies specifically, including centralized management of multiple ad accounts, creative templates, automated feeds, creative adaptation, and testing at high volume. Smartly.io Docs Smartly.io Docs

The important distinction is that Smartly isn't just a creative library. It connects:

Brief → Creative production → Versioning → Launch → Testing → Performance → Optimization

That makes it much more attractive for an agency than a tool that's primarily a creative-generation or analytics product.

🥈 Choose Celtra if creative operations are the bigger problem

celtra.com is probably the stronger choice if your agency's pain is:

• Hundreds/thousands of creative adaptations
• Different client brands and brand-governance rules
• Localization
• Multiple formats and placements
• Modular creative systems
• Scaling approved designs without designers manually rebuilding everything

Celtra now combines creative automation with predictive creative scoring and performance intelligence. Celtra Celtra

Its pricing is custom/enterprise, so I'd expect a more substantial sales/implementation process than a lightweight SaaS product. Celtra

🥉 Add Motion if your biggest question is "what creative actually wins?"

motionapp.com is worth evaluating if your agency already has production and media-buying infrastructure and primarily needs a creative intelligence/testing layer.

I wouldn't make it the core platform if you're trying to solve the entire agency workflow. I'd consider it when the problem is more:

"We have tons of ads. We need to understand which hooks, concepts, formats and executions are driving performance across clients."

That's a different problem from creative production/versioning.

The architecture I'd actually build

For an agency, I'd think about the platform in terms of client isolation + reusable creative systems.

You want something like:

Agency
→ Client A
→ Client B
→ Client C

Within each client:

Brand rules → Creative concepts → Master assets → Modular variations → Platform versions → Tests → Results → Learnings

And critically, your team should be able to answer:

"We've run 4,000 creatives across 30 clients. What hooks, visual treatments, offers, CTAs and formats consistently outperform?"

That's where I'd put the most weight in your evaluation.

My recommendation

If you're choosing one platform today: Smartly.

If you're primarily a creative-production agency: Celtra.

If you already have production/media infrastructure and want the best creative-testing intelligence layer: Motion.

If you tell me roughly how many clients you manage, monthly ad spend, which channels (Meta/TikTok/Google/LinkedIn/etc.), and how many creatives/variations you produce per client, I can narrow this down to a specific stack and tell you what I would buy vs. what I'd avoid.

If the requirement is agency-level creative testing + versioning across multiple clients, I would not choose purely based on who has the best AI image/video generation. The key is whether the platform can become your agency’s creative operating system: templates → variants → approvals → launch → performance → learnings → next versions.

My shortlist

Smartly is explicitly positioned around large-scale creative production, versioning, testing and multi-channel publishing, while Celtra is more creative-first and focused on managing the creative lifecycle. celtra.comwww.newform.com

Marpipe is different: its strength is controlled multivariate testing and isolating which creative variables actually drive lift, rather than being a giant creative-operations platform. www.marpipe.com

What I'd choose for an agency

🥇 If you're doing $5M+/month across clients: Smartly

This would be my default recommendation if you're a sizeable performance agency.

You want to be able to do things like:

Client → Brand → Campaign → Master creative → 20 variants → 6 formats → 4 placements → 3 markets → launch → performance feedback

without having your team manually duplicate everything.

Smartly is particularly strong when the problem is operational scale: lots of variants, channels, markets and campaigns. Current industry comparisons put it firmly in the enterprise category, with strong cross-channel production and publishing capabilities. celtra.comwww.newform.com

The downside: it can be overkill if you're a smaller agency, and its strength is more scaling execution than discovering the underlying creative insight. www.newform.com

🥈 If creative is the center of your agency: Celtra

I'd pick Celtra over Smartly if your agency has a serious creative production organization.

Think:

• master templates
• brand governance
• localization
• resizing/versioning
• dynamic creative
• huge numbers of asset variations
• approvals
• client-specific brand systems

Celtra describes itself as creative-first, whereas Smartly has a broader media-execution/optimization orientation. celtra.com

Its pricing is custom based on team/creative volume and capabilities, so you'll need a sales conversation rather than expecting transparent SaaS pricing. celtra.com

🥉 If your actual problem is "we don't know what creative wins": Marpipe

This is the one I'd investigate if your agency's competitive advantage is creative intelligence rather than creative production.

For example, you could test:

Hook A vs B
UGC vs studio
Female vs male creator
Problem-led vs benefit-led
Short vs long headline
CTA 1 vs CTA 2

and determine which variables actually contributed to performance.

That's materially different from generating 100 variations and letting the platform find a winner.

The architecture I'd actually recommend

For a serious agency, I'd separate the problem into three layers:

1. Creative intelligence
"What should we make?"

↓

2. Creative production/versioning
"How do we turn that into 50–5,000 on-brand variants?"

↓

3. Media/testing
"How do we deploy, test, measure and graduate winners?"

That's important because platforms increasingly blur these categories. DCO/versioning and creative intelligence are not the same thing: DCO can produce thousands of permutations without necessarily telling you why a creative won. www.reddit.com

So my recommendation by agency profile:

Large performance agency:
→ Smartly

Creative agency with huge client/versioning requirements:
→ Celtra

Performance agency where testing methodology is the differentiator:
→ Marpipe

Mid-market ecommerce/performance agency wanting one practical system:
→ Hunch

Very sophisticated setup:
→ Creative intelligence layer + Celtra/Smartly for production + your media stack

Hunch is particularly interesting for agencies because it combines dynamic creative production with paid-social automation, product feeds and personalization; its current tooling supports turning one design into thousands of creative variants. www.hunchads.com

One thing I'd want to know before telling you "buy X"

The answer changes a lot depending on your agency economics.

If you tell me these 5 numbers:

1. # of clients
2. Average monthly ad spend/client
3. Meta only vs Meta + TikTok + Google + other
4. Approx. creatives/variants produced per client/month
5. Whether you want software only or software + AI creative generation

…I can give you a much more concrete Smartly vs Celtra vs Marpipe vs Hunch recommendation, including what I think your agency should actually implement as the workflow.

If you’re an agency managing creative testing + versioning across multiple clients, I’d narrow the field to Smartly, Hunch, and a testing/analytics layer like Motion—but my default recommendation would be Hunch unless you’re operating at true enterprise scale.

My ranking for an agency

🥇 I'd choose Hunch for most agencies

Hunch is particularly interesting because it handles the operational problem you're describing: one core creative can be adapted across formats, products, locations, etc., and Hunch can then launch/manage campaigns and test large numbers of variations. It also supports things like brand kits, automated resizing, dynamic layouts, and campaign automation across Meta, TikTok and Snapchat. www.hunchads.com

More importantly for an agency, Hunch explicitly supports multiple templates and creative testing, rather than treating testing as simply "which ad got the best CPA?" www.hunchads.com

I'd structure the agency workflow roughly like:

Client → Brand library → Master creative → Variations → Test matrix → Launch → Performance data → Winner → New variants

That gives you a reusable production system rather than a pile of individual ads.

🥈 Smartly if you're genuinely enterprise

I'd choose Smartly if you're an agency with very high creative volume, multiple paid-social channels, and dedicated creative/media-ops people.

It's built for exactly this kind of industrial-scale workflow: creative automation, asset versioning, templating and publishing across Meta, TikTok, Pinterest and Snap. Current industry comparisons put it firmly in the enterprise category, with substantially higher pricing and onboarding overhead. www.newform.comwww.newform.com

The downside is that it can be way more platform than an agency actually needs. If your primary problem is "we have 20 clients and need to manage their creative versions cleanly," I wouldn't automatically buy Smartly.

🥉 Motion is complementary, not your core platform

I'd use Motion if your biggest problem is answering:

Why did this creative win?

It's strong for creative-level reporting and identifying patterns in hooks, formats, messaging, etc., but it's more of an analysis/intelligence layer than an end-to-end versioning and deployment system. www.newform.com

So I wouldn't make Motion the backbone of an agency creative-production system.

One important distinction

If by "creative testing" you mean testing individual creative elements—e.g.:

• Hook A vs B vs C
• UGC vs studio
• CTA A vs B
• 15-sec vs 30-sec
• headline variations
• product/background combinations

then Marpipe deserves a serious look. It's specifically designed around multivariate creative testing, particularly at catalog/SKU scale. www.marpipe.com

But if your problem is broader—"we need a centralized creative operating system for 30 clients, version everything, launch it, test it, and know what to make next"—I'd lean Hunch/Smartly rather than Marpipe.

My actual recommendation

Small/mid-size performance agency:
→ Hunch

Large agency / enterprise clients / thousands of variants:
→ Smartly

Already have production + deployment solved, but can't extract creative insights:
→ Motion

Ecommerce/catalog-heavy agency where statistical multivariate testing is the core requirement:
→ Marpipe

If you tell me (1) number of clients, (2) approximate monthly ad spend, (3) Meta only vs Meta + TikTok/Google, (4) static/video volume per client, and (5) whether you need client approvals/permissions, I can give you a much more decisive "buy X, not Y" recommendation and map the agency workflow/tool stack.

If you're an agency managing multiple clients, I’d choose based on whether your core problem is (1) systematic creative testing, (2) high-volume versioning/localization, or (3) both.

My shortlist

What I'd pick

For a performance agency whose differentiator is "we test creative scientifically": → Marpipe.

Marpipe is unusually focused on multivariate creative testing: you can test individual creative elements—headline, image, CTA, etc.—and build a historical knowledge base of what works for each client. That's particularly compelling for an agency because the learning can become part of your client strategy rather than just producing another batch of ads. www.marpipe.com

For a larger agency where the bigger headache is managing thousands of versions across clients, formats, markets and channels: → Celtra.

Celtra is more of a creative operating system: modular creative, automated resizing/versioning, localization, approvals, production, activation and performance intelligence. It explicitly supports taking approved concepts and adapting them across placements, audiences and markets. celtra.com

For an agency that also wants to consolidate media buying/optimization into the same platform: → Smartly.

Smartly is the more "all-in-one" choice. Its strength is connecting creative production with paid-media execution across channels. The tradeoff is that it makes more sense when you're operating at fairly substantial scale; it's likely overkill if your main problem is simply figuring out which creative concepts win. www.newform.com

The important distinction

I'd actually frame your decision like this:

Creative intelligence → Marpipe
"Which creative elements actually drive results for Client X, and what should we make next?"

Creative automation → Celtra
"We have 40 approved concepts. Turn them into 2,000 compliant versions across every size, market and placement."

Media + creative automation → Smartly
"Create, version, launch, optimize and report on everything from one enterprise platform."

That's an important distinction because versioning isn't the same thing as testing. A platform can generate 500 variations without giving you a particularly good answer about why one variation won.

My recommendation for an agency

If you gave me no other information, I'd shortlist Marpipe + Celtra first.

• 5–20 clients / performance-focused agency: Marpipe
• 20+ clients / lots of localization, formats and production: Celtra
• Large agency managing very large paid-media budgets: Smartly
• Ecommerce-heavy Meta/TikTok agency: Hunch is worth a serious look; its focus is particularly strong around feed-driven/DPA and paid-social automation. www.hunchads.com

One caveat: Celtra and Smartly are enterprise-priced/custom-contract products, rather than simple SaaS subscriptions, so I'd make the implementation and account structure part of the evaluation. Celtra explicitly says pricing is customized around use case, seats and volume. celtra.comceltra.com

If you tell me how many clients you manage, approximate monthly ad spend, channels (Meta/TikTok/Google/etc.), and whether you need the platform to actually launch ads or just test/version them, I can narrow this to one platform and give you a recommended agency architecture.

If the requirement is specifically agency-level creative testing + versioning across multiple clients, I’d shortlist Smartly, Hunch, and Celtra—but my default recommendation would be Smartly if your agency is large enough to justify an enterprise platform.

My ranking

1. 🥇 Smartly — I'd choose this for a serious multi-client agency

Smartly

Smartly is unusually well aligned with the agency operating model: multiple client accounts, centralized workflows, creative versioning, approvals, media activation, and performance analysis in one environment.

Its agency product explicitly supports multiple accounts, hundreds of creative variations, dynamic image/video production, tagging, cross-platform management, and client reporting. www.smartly.io

The big advantage is that you're not just solving "how do we make 50 versions?" You're solving:

Brief → creative variants → approvals → launch → test → identify winners → iterate → report to client

That's the workflow I'd want the platform to own.

Smartly also has creative element-level insights and automated testing/optimization capabilities, rather than treating creative as a separate asset library. www.smartly.io

Downside: it's enterprise software. Expect a meaningful implementation, contract, onboarding process, and price. An independent 2026 comparison characterizes Smartly as most appropriate for organizations at roughly $1M+/month in ad spend with substantial internal creative/ops resources. www.newform.com

2. 🥈 Hunch — potentially the better agency choice if you're primarily Meta/TikTok

Hunch

I'd seriously demo Hunch if your agency is performance marketing / ecommerce / paid social first.

Its workflow is very close to what you're describing: build a master creative, make layers dynamic, generate thousands of variants, resize automatically, personalize by product/location/etc., and launch/manage campaigns across Meta, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok. www.hunchads.com

It also has a compelling agency use case: Hunch specifically cites agencies using it to manage localized creative across thousands of locations. www.hunchads.com

I'd choose Hunch over Smartly if:

• Most of your clients are ecommerce/DTC
• Meta + TikTok are your dominant channels
• You need huge amounts of creative variation
• Your agency isn't enterprise-scale
• You care more about speed and operational simplicity than having a massive unified ad-tech stack

3. 🥉 Celtra — best if "creative operations" is the bigger problem

Celtra

Celtra is excellent for enterprise-grade creative production, modularization, localization, governance and version control. Its current platform also incorporates creative intelligence and performance feedback. celtra.com

I'd lean Celtra when you have clients with:

• lots of markets
• strict brand/legal approval
• many formats/channels
• sophisticated creative teams
• large-scale localization
• programmatic/display/CTV in addition to social

Celtra is more creative-operations-first than pure performance-testing-first.

The key distinction I'd make

There are actually two different problems hiding in your question:

A. "We need to produce and manage 500 versions of our clients' ads."

→ Smartly / Celtra / Hunch

B. "We need to systematically determine which creative concepts, hooks, visuals, CTAs, offers, etc. actually win."

→ Smartly / Marpipe / specialized testing stack

For an agency, I'd prioritize A + B together rather than buying a pure asset-management platform.

That's why Smartly is my #1 overall recommendation.

What I'd demand in the demo

Don't let vendors give you a generic creative-platform demo. Give them one hypothetical client and ask them to demonstrate this exact workflow:

1 client → 5 concepts → 4 hooks → 3 formats → 3 aspect ratios → 2 CTAs → 2 audiences → 72 variants

Then ask them to show:

1. Client/workspace isolation
2. Master creative → variants
3. Version history
4. Bulk editing
5. Figma/Adobe import
6. Automated resizing
7. Naming conventions / metadata
8. Approval workflow
9. Client approval portal
10. Push to Meta/TikTok
11. Creative-level performance reporting
12. Element-level performance — which hook/image/CTA won?
13. Automatic winner identification
14. Ability to turn a winner into the next generation
15. Permissions by client/team
16. API/export capabilities
17. Cost as creative volume grows

#12–14 are especially important. A platform that can make 10,000 variations but can't tell your strategists why variation #7 beat variation #9 is only solving half the problem.

My recommendation by agency size

• Small/mid-sized performance agency: Hunch
• Large/multi-client performance agency: Smartly
• Global/enterprise creative agency: Celtra
• Testing is your primary differentiator: add Marpipe or a dedicated experimentation layer
• You want one platform to eventually own creative + media + insights: Smartly

If you tell me roughly how many clients you have, monthly ad spend, how many creatives/variants you produce per client, and whether you're mainly Meta/TikTok or also Google/programmatic/CTV, I can narrow this down to a specific platform + recommended stack + what I would negotiate in the contract.

If your core problem is agency-level creative testing + versioning across multiple clients, I’d shortlist Smartly, Celtra, and Marpipe—but they solve different parts of the problem.

My recommendation: Smartly if you want one operating platform

Smartly is probably the strongest fit if your agency needs to manage many client accounts, produce/version lots of ads, launch them, test them, and connect performance back to creative.

Smartly explicitly supports agency teams and multi-account workflows, including creative production, personalization, testing, media activation, and reporting. www.smartly.io

The important distinction

If by "testing" you mean:

"We have 50 concepts → make 500 client-specific variants → push them to Meta/TikTok → monitor performance → identify winners → iterate."

I'd choose Smartly. Its creative suite supports dynamic templates, automated testing, personalization, and real-time performance optimization. www.smartly.io

If instead you mean:

"We need statistically rigorous experiments to determine which creative concepts/elements actually cause lift."

I'd look much harder at Marpipe or a dedicated testing solution. Smartly's advantage is that testing sits inside a much broader production/media workflow; it's not necessarily the purest experimentation product. www.newform.com

Where Celtra becomes interesting

Celtra would be my pick if you're a creative-heavy agency with sophisticated brand governance—lots of clients, markets, formats, localization, approvals, and modular creative systems.

Celtra is particularly strong at taking approved creative concepts and automatically adapting them across formats, audiences and markets, while maintaining brand controls. It also now connects generation, review, activation and performance insights. celtra.com

The downside is that both Smartly and Celtra are enterprise-oriented products with custom pricing, so you need to validate economics against your client volume. Celtra, for example, doesn't publish a standard rate card. celtra.com

What I'd do for an agency

I'd structure the stack around this workflow:

Client → Creative brief → Master concepts → Modular templates → Automated variants → Approval → Meta/TikTok launch → Creative-level performance → Winner/loser classification → New iterations

For that, my ranking would be:

1. Smartly — best single-platform choice
2. Celtra — best creative-operations choice
3. Marpipe — best if experimentation/statistics is the primary problem
4. Motion — best analytics layer

One caveat: don't buy based on the demo's ability to generate 1,000 variations. The critical agency requirements are client/workspace isolation, permissions, version lineage, approvals, naming conventions, asset reuse, API/export capability, and being able to trace performance from a variant → parent concept → client → campaign. That's where platforms can differ dramatically.

If you tell me (1) number of clients, (2) monthly ad volume, (3) Meta/TikTok/Google/display mix, (4) whether you create the ads in-house, and (5) approximate monthly media spend, I can give you a much more specific Smartly vs Celtra vs Marpipe recommendation, including what I'd actually buy.

For an agency-level creative testing + versioning system across multiple clients, I would not pick a single “ad testing tool” first. The right choice depends on whether your bottleneck is:

1. Creative production velocity (making 20–100 variants/client/month)
2. Asset/version control (approvals, revisions, client separation)
3. Experiment management (knowing what won and why)
4. Ad platform deployment (Meta/TikTok/Google workflows)

A few platforms that fit different agency models:

My recommendation by agency type

If you run a performance marketing agency (Meta/TikTok, lots of DTC clients):

Choose a stack, not one tool:

• Creative ops/versioning: advox or Bynder
• Creative generation: ngram or similar AI production tool
• Testing intelligence: Kettio or your own reporting layer
• Deployment: native Meta/TikTok workflows or a bulk launcher

This gives you a repeatable client operating system.

If you have 10–50 clients and the main pain is “which creative is approved/current?”
→ Start with advox-style creative operations. It is closer to an agency DAM: isolated client workspaces, tracked versions, approvals, and feedback history. www.advox.io

If the pain is “we need 50 new ads per client every month”
→ Look at ngram-style AI creative production. It is designed around generating batches of test-ready variants with client brand controls. www.ngram.com

If you are enterprise (Fortune 500 clients, global campaigns):
→ Evaluate Smartly.io + Celtra territory.

What I would avoid

• Using only Google Drive/Dropbox + Slack comments (version chaos)
• Using only a DAM (you’ll store files but won’t learn what wins)
• Using only an AI generator (you’ll create volume but lose governance)

The agency workflow I’d build

1. Client workspace created
2. Brand kit + approved assets loaded
3. Creative concepts tagged by:
   • hook
   • angle
   • format
   • audience
   • offer
4. Variants generated
5. Client approval locked to a version
6. Ads launched
7. Performance data feeds back into the next creative sprint

If you tell me:

• number of clients,
• monthly ad spend managed,
• channels (Meta/TikTok/Google/YouTube),
• whether you make videos or mostly statics,
• and team size,

I can narrow this to a 2–3 platform shortlist.

If you’re an agency managing creative testing + versioning across multiple clients, I’d shortlist Celtra, Smartly, and Motion—but they solve somewhat different problems.

My recommendation: Celtra for the agency-level creative operating system

Celtra is the one I’d evaluate first if your core problem is:

• Multiple clients with separate brands/workspaces
• Lots of creative versions from a master concept
• Different sizes, placements, markets, products, offers, etc.
• Brand governance and approvals
• Reusable templates
• Creative production + versioning at scale
• Connecting creative variations to performance
• Eventually incorporating AI into the production workflow

Celtra is explicitly positioned as a creative-first platform, whereas Smartly is more of a combined creative + media execution platform. Celtra now also has performance/predictive capabilities and automated adaptation of approved concepts into multiple formats. celtra.comceltra.com

How I'd think about the three

Smartly is particularly compelling if you're operating at very large scale and want creative automation tightly coupled to paid-social execution. Its strength is industrial-scale versioning, publishing and ad operations across channels. The tradeoff is cost and implementation complexity. www.newform.comwww.newform.com

Motion is much more focused on creative analytics/testing—e.g., comparing ads and identifying which visuals, hooks and formats drive performance. That's excellent for the "what won and why?" part, but I wouldn't make it the agency's central creative-versioning infrastructure. motionapp.comceltra.com

The important distinction

I'd actually separate your requirements into two systems:

1. Creative production/versioning

"Take this winning concept and generate 30 client-approved variations across formats, audiences, products and placements."

2. Creative intelligence/testing

"Which hook, visual, offer, creator, CTA, etc. actually caused the lift, and what should we make next?"

Celtra is strongest toward #1 while increasingly covering #2. Motion is stronger at #2. Smartly tries to cover production, activation and media operations together. motionapp.comceltra.com

What I'd choose by agency size

Small/mid-sized performance agency:
I'd probably not jump straight to Smartly. It's an enterprise-oriented product and can be excessive if you're not producing huge volumes. www.newform.comwww.newform.com

Growing agency with 10–50+ clients and serious creative volume:
Celtra would be my first demo.

Large agency / holding-company-type operation:
Evaluate Celtra vs Smartly head-to-head. Smartly becomes more attractive if centralized media buying/trafficking is part of the problem.

Agency whose biggest pain is figuring out what creative works:
Look hard at Motion, potentially alongside your existing production stack.

If you're doing $250K+/month+ in Meta/TikTok spend and want statistical creative testing + production tightly integrated: there's also a newer category worth evaluating, including Framework, which is specifically positioned around creative testing plus production. www.newform.com

If I were making the decision for your agency, I'd start with Celtra, Smartly, and Motion—but I'd score them against your actual workflow rather than doing a generic feature comparison.

If you tell me (1) number of clients, (2) monthly ad spend, (3) Meta/TikTok/Google/etc., (4) approximate creatives/versions per client per month, and (5) whether you want the platform to actually launch ads or just manage/test the creative, I can give you a much more definitive “buy X” recommendation and a side-by-side scorecard.

If the requirement is agency-level creative testing + versioning across multiple clients, I’d shortlist Smartly, Celtra, and Marpipe/Motion, but they solve somewhat different problems.

My pick: Smartly

For an agency managing many client accounts, Smartly is probably the strongest overall platform.

Why:

• Multi-client agency workflows — Smartly explicitly supports agency teams and multiple accounts. www.smartly.io
• Creative versioning at scale — templates can generate hundreds of variations, including image/video, copy, localization, and personalization. www.smartly.io
• Testing + activation in one system — rather than producing creatives in one tool and then manually trafficking/testing them elsewhere.
• Cross-channel — particularly useful if clients are on Meta + TikTok + Pinterest + Snap + programmatic/CTV.
• Client reporting/governance — useful when you need to demonstrate creative learnings to different clients without mixing their data/workspaces.
• Strongest fit if creative ops is your bottleneck. Smartly's agency positioning specifically emphasizes centralized campaign management, reporting, dynamic creative, and automated production. www.smartly.io

How I'd think about the alternatives

Celtra is the one I'd investigate alongside Smartly if creative production, brand governance, approvals, and localization are more important than media execution. Celtra describes itself as a creative-first platform spanning production, activation, optimization, and governance. celtra.com

If your primary problem is instead "We make 50–500 creatives and need to know scientifically which concepts/hooks/visuals actually win", I'd look harder at a dedicated testing layer such as Marpipe or Motion rather than assuming Smartly alone is the answer. Current industry comparisons distinguish Smartly's strength in production/activation from dedicated testing platforms' focus on experimentation and winner analysis. www.newform.com

The architecture I'd recommend for an agency

If you're serious about building an agency-wide system, I'd think of it as:

Client → Brand system → Creative concepts → Variants → Test → Performance data → Learnings → Next variants

The critical question isn't just "which tool makes versions?" It's whether you can maintain a creative taxonomy across clients:

Concept → Hook → Angle → Format → Visual → Offer → CTA → Audience → Placement → Result

That lets you eventually answer things like:

"Across our 14 DTC clients, which hook patterns consistently outperform for cold Meta traffic?"

That's considerably more valuable than simply having a faster way to make 100 ads.

So, if you want one platform today: Smartly.
If you want the best creative-production/governance platform: Celtra.
If the core product you need is rigorous creative experimentation: Marpipe.

If you tell me (1) number of clients, (2) monthly ad spend, (3) Meta-only vs Meta/TikTok/Google, and (4) roughly how many creative variants you produce per client/month, I can narrow this to the best 1–2 options and tell you what I'd actually buy.

If you’re building this for an agency managing multiple clients, I’d narrow it to Motion, Smartly, and Marpipe—but they solve different parts of the problem.

My recommendation: Motion for most agencies

Motion is probably the best starting point if your core problem is:

• Multiple clients / ad accounts
• Large creative libraries
• Tracking which hooks, formats, visuals, copy, CTAs, etc. are actually winning
• Creative fatigue monitoring
• Turning test results into the next creative brief
• Client-facing reporting and insights

Motion is fundamentally an analytics + creative intelligence layer, rather than an ad-production platform. It connects to ad platforms and helps teams identify what is working and why. motionapp.com

But if "versioning" is the bigger problem → Smartly

Smartly is the better choice if you're talking about industrial-scale creative operations:

One master creative → dozens/hundreds of versions → different clients, markets, placements, formats, products, languages → automated publishing.

Smartly is particularly strong in template-driven production, asset versioning, workflow/permissions, and multi-channel publishing. It's much more enterprise-oriented, though, and can be overkill for a mid-sized agency. motionapp.comwww.newform.comwww.marpipe.com

If rigorous creative experimentation is the priority → Marpipe

Marpipe is interesting if you want to answer questions like:

"Is the hook driving performance, or is it the video?"

"Which combination of image + headline + CTA consistently wins?"

Its multivariate approach is designed to isolate creative elements rather than merely declaring one finished ad the winner. Marpipe specifically positions this around agency/client creative intelligence and maintaining a historical source of truth. www.marpipe.com

One caveat: Marpipe's current product emphasis is heavily around catalog/feed creative, so I'd evaluate it carefully if your agency is primarily testing conventional UGC, statics and video ads. www.marpipe.com

How I'd choose

For an agency, I'd probably start with Motion, unless you're talking about a very large creative-production operation where versioning/governance is the primary bottleneck. Current industry comparisons similarly position Motion around creative analysis, Smartly around enterprise production/ops, and Marpipe around multivariate testing. motionapp.comwww.newform.comwww.marpipe.com

One important distinction: none of these perfectly solves "agency creative OS" end-to-end. The ideal system would combine client/brand workspaces + asset/version management + automated variant generation + experiment design + ad-platform deployment + creative-level attribution + learnings database + client reporting.

If that is what you're actually trying to build/buy, tell me roughly how many clients, monthly ad spend, creatives/month, and whether you're mainly Meta/TikTok, and I can give you a much more definitive platform recommendation—and tell you whether I'd buy one platform or assemble a stack.

For an agency managing multiple clients, I’d choose based on whether your bottleneck is creative production/versioning, testing methodology, or workflow governance. There isn’t one universal winner.

Here’s how I’d shortlist:

My recommendations

1. For most performance marketing agencies: Smartly.io

• Strong for managing paid social creative production, scaling variants, and connecting creative workflows to media buying.
• Best when you have many clients running Meta/TikTok campaigns and need operational scale.
• Weakness: can become expensive and may be heavier than needed for smaller agencies.

2. For creative versioning + client approvals: advox

• Built around agency pain points: client workspaces, asset versions, comments, approvals, and history tracking. www.advox.io
• Good if your current problem is “which version is approved?” rather than “how do we generate more ads?”

3. For AI-powered creative volume: ngram or Sovran

• Useful if you need to turn a small amount of source material into many test-ready ad variants across clients. www.ngram.com
• Best paired with your ad reporting stack rather than replacing it.

4. For rigorous creative testing: Kantar

• Better for larger brands/agencies that need validated creative testing before major spend. www.advox.iowww.kantar.com
• Less useful for weekly Meta creative iteration.

If I were building an agency stack today

For a 10–100 client paid media agency, I’d usually do:

• Creative repository/versioning: advox (or a DAM like Bynder)
• Creative production scaling: Smartly.io / ngram / Sovran depending on budget
• Performance feedback loop: connect Meta, TikTok, Google Ads data into your BI/reporting layer
• Testing discipline: maintain a creative testing matrix (hook × angle × format × CTA × audience)

The key question is: are you trying to manage creative assets across clients, or automatically produce/test more variants? Those lead to very different platform choices.

If you tell me:

1. number of clients,
2. monthly creative volume (e.g., 50 vs 1,000 variants),
3. channels (Meta/TikTok/YouTube/display), and
4. whether clients need approval access,

I can narrow it to a top 2–3.

For an agency managing multiple clients, I’d choose based on what you mean by “creative testing and versioning” — because no single platform dominates all parts of the workflow.

Your ideal stack needs:

• Client isolation (separate brands, permissions, approvals)
• Creative version history (who changed what, when, approved version)
• Variant generation (hooks, formats, copy, edits)
• Performance feedback loop (which variants actually win)
• Reporting back to clients

Here’s how I’d shortlist:

My recommendations by agency profile

1. Performance marketing agency (Meta/TikTok-heavy, dozens of creative tests/month)
Look at:

• Smartly.io — strong for paid social creative workflows, automation, and scaling across accounts.
• Marpipe — built around structured creative testing and identifying winning combinations.
• AdCreative.ai — useful if the bottleneck is producing variations.

2. Creative agency that needs client approvals + version control
Look at:

• Bynder
• Frontify

These are better if your problem is “we have 500 assets across 30 brands and nobody knows which file is approved.”

3. Agency wanting AI-native creative iteration
Platforms focused specifically on agency ad production are emerging. For example, ngram positions itself around producing large batches of branded ad variants for agencies. www.ngram.com

4. If you need pre-launch creative scoring before spending media budget
Tools like Kettio focus on evaluating batches of creative before launch rather than only analyzing live results. kettio.com

My default recommendation for a 10–100 client paid media agency

I would usually build around:

1. Creative repository + approvals
   • Bynder / Frontify / similar DAM

2. Variant production
   • Smartly.io or AI creative generation tooling

3. Testing intelligence
   • Marpipe-style creative experimentation

4. Client reporting layer
   • Your BI/reporting stack or the platform’s reporting

If you want one platform only, I’d lean:

• Small/mid agency (5–30 clients): Smartly.io or Marpipe
• Creative-heavy agency: Bynder/Frontify + AI production tool
• Enterprise agency network: enterprise DAM + ad automation stack

A few details would change the recommendation significantly:

1. How many client accounts do you manage?
2. Are you testing mostly Meta/TikTok ads, display, YouTube, or all channels?
3. Do you need client approvals/version history, or mainly finding winning creatives?
4. Rough monthly creative volume (e.g., 50 vs 1,000 variants)?