Based in San Francisco, Metadata.io is a Demand Generation and ABM platform designed to execute thousands of B2B campaigns in a matter of hours, automatically optimizing campaigns for pipeline impact at a high velocity.
$24,000
per year
Pricing
Metadata.io
Editions & Modules
MetaMatch
$295
per month per installation
Web Personalization
$24,000
per year
Audience Targeting
$24,000
per year
Metadata Base Platform
$60,000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Metadata.io
Free Trial
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
$2,500 one-time fee per installation
Additional Details
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Metadata.io
Considered Both Products
Metadata.io
Verified User
Manager
Chose Metadata.io
Metadata is way more cleaner in UI. Especially the UI of Facebook ad management is truly a horror show, glad to reduce my time spent in there.
Pricing. You can't beat metadata's metamatch audience package. Clearbit charges on a CPM basis on the amount of spend used on a certain audience while metadata is a flat fee
RollWorks use case was more traditional ABM. Metadata is truly a paid social powerhouse for us. It's integral to our paid social program. It has more audience & ad capabilities as well.
We choose Metadata.io because their solution would bring B2B targeting on all platforms. Other providers only offer this feature only on Facebook. Metadata.io also works as a campaign management platform, meanwhile, other providers only create audiences that are pushed to the …
These aren't apples-to-apples comparisons: I used Triblio at a previous company. Triblio is primarily for ABM display and you can have smaller audience pools (to the company level). Metadata has a display ad component that I am not currently licensed for. Triblio has added ABM …
We chose [Metadata.io] because it was a smaller company and could get more personalized attention. The price was better and they seemed more eager to support us. The feature set was what we were looking for and not more - it was exactly as robust as we needed it to be. Didn't …
Metadata is well suited when you have a really large ad budget (>50k per month at least). This is because the power of metadata lies in the ability to quickly set up and run a large number of experiments (combinations of channel, audience, creative, and conversion assets). To evaluate these variations, all of them need a large number of impressions, clicks, and conversions to be statistically relevant. If your budget is smaller, you will either have a very small number of experiments (not fully utilizing the power of metadata), or your experiments will not have enough clicks to make informed decisions. We had expected a better explanation of this from metadata before signing up.
If you don't have a large budget and audience it's hard to meaningfully optimize. If I have 4 ad creatives, to 2 audience groups on FB and LinkedIn, that creates 16 experiments, each of which needs an ample enough budget, say $40/day, that's now $640 per day or $19K per month.
Limited ability to edit ads after they've been launched. You usually have to stop the ad, clone it, and launch a new campaign.
Can't add new ads to existing campaigns which limits the ability to optimize. If I start an MD campaign with 4 ads, and in a few weeks we see that one is working well and the other 2 are not performing, I can pause those (or it can autopause by rules), but I can't add 2 more new creatives to the mix against the high performer. I'd have to either stop the high performer, and recreate it in a new campaign (losing likes and comments), OR - leave the high performer in the first campaign, and create. a second campaign with the new ones, which will only optimize against each other.
Limited to a single conversion event on a landing page. I'm not able to choose either a Demo Request OR a Sign-Up conversion, I can only choose one.
Google search ads are doable but aren't necessarily more feature-rich or easy-to use than native, so there's no value added to doing it through Metadata in my opinion aside from unifying ad reporting.
We chose [Metadata.io] because it was a smaller company and could get more personalized attention. The price was better and they seemed more eager to support us. The feature set was what we were looking for and not more - it was exactly as robust as we needed it to be. Didn't want to pay for features we weren't going to use.
Huge decrease in CPLs, CPMQL and Cost Per Opportunity
Big improvement in MQL to SQL rates
90%+ of our leads from paid social now have valid business emails, before it was like 30%
Saving us hundreds of hours over the course of the next year doing daily manual optimization and budget management tasks for us so we can focus on strategy and testing new things