[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"blog-en-top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked":3,"blog-related-category-en-top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked":50,"blog-translations-top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked":63,"blog-related-latest-en-top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked":64},{"id":4,"type":5,"locale":6,"slug":7,"title":8,"description":9,"body":10,"status":11,"section":12,"tags":13,"author":18,"cover_url":19,"published_at":20,"metadata":21,"template":5,"sort_order":45,"source_id":46,"search_vector":47,"created_at":48,"updated_at":49},"8bcade42-938c-49d8-a9fe-5ae0143f24cb","blog","en","top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked","Top Amazon advertising agencies ranked","Rank advertising agencies yourself on five weighted criteria, caseload heaviest, in twenty minutes per candidate. Under 35 of 60 gets no second call.","Any published ranking is ordered by who paid, who wrote it, or who is largest, and none of\nthose predict what your account will get. Rank them yourself against five weighted criteria.\nThe scoring sheet below takes about twenty minutes per candidate and beats every list you\nwill find.\n\n## The short version\n\n- **Published rankings measure the agency's marketing,** not your likely outcome.\n- **Rank on five criteria:** caseload, ACoS-by-stage reasoning, diagnosis, channel coverage, transparency.\n- **Weight caseload heaviest.** It predicts attention better than anything else.\n- **Score live, on your own product,** not from case studies.\n- **The largest agency is rarely the right one** for a brand under seven figures.\n\n## Why I will not publish a list\n\nI run an Amazon agency, so any ranking I publish would put Flapen near the top and would\ndeserve to be ignored for exactly that reason. Beyond that, ranking other companies requires\nfactual claims about their pricing, staffing, and results that I cannot verify, and getting\nthose wrong would be unfair to them and useless to you.\n\nWhat I can give you is the method we would use if we were hiring an agency, which is a\nquestion I have been on the other side of. Before Flapen I ran data and technology at BRANDED\nand Moonshot Brands, two large Amazon aggregators, where selecting and terminating agencies\nwas part of the job.\n\n## The scoring sheet\n\nScore each candidate 0 to 5 on each criterion, multiply by the weight, and total. Twenty\nminutes per candidate on one call.\n\n| Criterion | Weight | 0 points | 5 points |\n|---|---:|---|---|\n| Caseload per account manager | ×3 | Will not say | A number in writing, under 5 |\n| ACoS reasoning by product stage | ×3 | One target for everything | Two numbers, each justified |\n| Diagnosis before bids | ×2 | Starts at bid adjustments | Starts at conversion and click-through |\n| Traffic channel coverage | ×2 | Sponsored Products only | All five, with economics for each |\n| Reporting transparency | ×2 | Spend and sales | Cost of customer acquisition by channel |\n\nMaximum is 60. In practice, anything under 35 should not reach a second conversation.\n\n### Why caseload carries the heaviest weight\n\nBecause it determines what actually happens to your account, and it is the number nobody\npublishes.\n\nAn excellent operator carrying twelve brands produces the same experience as a mediocre one:\nslow to notice problems, reassurance instead of analysis, plans that repeat because nothing\nshipped. We run about 1.4 brands per operator, which is why a full audit fits into week one\nrather than into whatever gaps exist in a calendar.\n\nAsk for the number in writing. Every agency can produce it in seconds, so hesitation is\nitself the score.\n\n### Why ACoS-by-stage carries equal weight\n\nIt is the fastest available test of whether someone manages ads or maintains them.\n\nA new product needs aggressive ACoS to build velocity and ranking. A mature product needs\nefficient ACoS to protect margin. Give a candidate a real product and ask for both numbers.\nTwo figures with reasons attached is a five. One number for both is a zero, regardless of how\nimpressive the rest of the call was.\n\n## How to run the comparison\n\n1. **Pick one real product** of yours, ideally one that is underperforming.\n2. **Give every candidate the same product and the same three questions.**\n3. **Score during the call,** not afterwards from memory.\n4. **Ask for the caseload number in writing** before the call ends.\n5. **Compare totals,** then check the two highest against your gut on responsiveness.\n\nRunning the same product past three candidates produces a sharper comparison in an afternoon\nthan weeks of reading case studies, because you are watching them think rather than reading\nwhat they chose to publish.\n\n## Why published rankings mislead\n\nThree mechanisms, none of them scandalous.\n\nDirectory rankings often reflect paid placement or review volume, which correlates with\nmarketing budget. Editorial listicles are usually written by content marketers at other\nagencies or tools, ordering by whatever suits their own positioning. And size-based rankings\nfavor large agencies, whose economics depend on high caseloads, which is the variable most\nnegatively correlated with what a small brand actually experiences.\n\nNone of that means the agencies on those lists are bad. It means the ordering is not about\nyou.\n\n## What most agencies will not tell you\n\nThe largest and best-known agency is frequently the wrong choice for a brand under seven\nfigures, and everyone in this industry knows it. Big agencies are structured around big\naccounts, and a small client inside that structure receives a junior manager carrying many\nbrands and a process designed for someone else.\n\nThat is not a criticism of them. It is a mismatch, and the mismatch is invisible in any\nranking because rankings measure the agency rather than the fit.\n\nThe second thing: ask every candidate, including us, which type of brand they are wrong for.\nAn agency that cannot name one is either very unusual or not being straight with you.\n\n## Related answers\n\n- [Best Amazon marketing agencies for sellers](\u002Fblog\u002Fbest-amazon-marketing-agencies-for-sellers)\n- [How to evaluate Amazon PPC agencies](\u002Fblog\u002Fhow-to-evaluate-amazon-ppc-agencies)\n- [Alternatives to big-box Amazon agencies](\u002Fblog\u002Falternatives-to-big-box-amazon-agencies)\n- [Case study proof to request from Amazon partners](\u002Fblog\u002Fcase-study-proof-to-request-from-amazon-partners)\n- [Hiring an Amazon agency: the complete guide](\u002Fblog\u002Fhiring-an-agency)\n\nScore us on the same sheet as everyone else. Our caseload number is published at [Flapen](\u002Famazon-consulting).\n\n## Keep learning\n\n- [Compare Amazon business models](\u002Fguides\u002Fbusiness-models)\n- [Value your Amazon business](\u002Ftools\u002Fbusiness-value-calculator)\n","published","working-with-agencies",[14,15,16,17],"ppc","amazon-fba","fees","competitor-analysis","joel-turcotte-gaucher","\u002Fimages\u002Fblog\u002Fclusters\u002Fhiring-an-agency-09.jpg","2026-09-04T01:44:51.798+00:00",{"faq":22,"seo":39,"batch":40,"cluster":41,"cover_alt":42,"answers_prompt":43,"primary_benchmark":44},[23,27,31,35],{"id":24,"answer":25,"question":26},"top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked-faq-1","Because the ordering reflects paid placement, the writer's positioning, or agency size. None of those predict what your specific account will receive, and size correlates with high caseloads.","Why not just use a published ranking?",{"id":28,"answer":29,"question":30},"top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked-faq-2","Brands per account manager. It predicts attention better than any other single variable, it is never published, and every agency can produce the number immediately if they choose to.","What should I weight most heavily?",{"id":32,"answer":33,"question":34},"top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked-faq-3","About twenty minutes per candidate, on one call, using the same real product for each. That comparison is sharper than weeks spent reading case studies.","How long does scoring take?",{"id":36,"answer":37,"question":38},"top-amazon-advertising-agencies-ranked-faq-4","Sometimes, for large brands whose needs match how big agencies are structured. For a brand under seven figures it usually means a junior manager carrying many accounts inside a process designed for someone else.","Is the biggest agency ever the right answer?",{},"B02","C01","Flapen cover for Top Amazon advertising agencies ranked: two Flapen operators and a client over a binder and a laptop at a meeting table","top amazon advertising agencies ranked","B4",0,null,"'\u002Famazon-consulting':910C '\u002Fblog\u002Falternatives-to-big-box-amazon-agencies':876C '\u002Fblog\u002Fbest-amazon-marketing-agencies-for-sellers':861C '\u002Fblog\u002Fcase-study-proof-to-request-from-amazon-partners':885C '\u002Fblog\u002Fhiring-an-agency':893C '\u002Fblog\u002Fhow-to-evaluate-amazon-ppc-agencies':868C '\u002Fguides\u002Fbusiness-models':917C '\u002Ftools\u002Fbusiness-value-calculator':922C '0':265C,286C '1':550C '1.4':425C '2':321C,336C,348C,562C '3':294C,309C,574C '35':22B,365C '4':583C '5':267C,288C,303C,595C '60':24B,360C 'a':135C,145C,223C,298C,369C,405C,432C,446C,489C,500C,510C,512C,526C,533C,616C,709C,753C,773C,780C,787C,796C,802C 'about':66C,181C,424C,731C 'account':51C,292C,386C 'accounts':771C 'acos':98C,304C,469C,494C,505C 'acos-by-stage':97C,468C 'acquisition':355C 'actually':382C,712C 'adjustments':325C 'ads':485C 'advertising':3A,7B 'afternoon':621C 'afterwards':580C 'against':57C,603C 'agencies':4A,8B,253C,676C,693C,719C,735C,766C,858C,867C,875C 'agency':85C,128C,151C,220C,455C,746C,816C,838C,889C 'aggregators':248C 'aggressive':493C 'all':340C 'alternatives':869C 'amazon':2A,150C,247C,856C,865C,874C,883C,888C,914C,920C,925 'amazon-fba':924 'an':149C,219C,394C,620C,837C,887C 'analysis':415C,930 'and':44C,71C,163C,185C,191C,200C,238C,242C,251C,275C,329C,350C,387C,498C,515C,569C,686C,742C,758C,772C,786C,804C 'answers':854C 'any':29C,153C,810C 'anything':114C,363C 'are':630C,668C,723C,767C,834C 'around':769C 'as':404C,900C 'ask':448C,516C,584C,824C 'at':240C,323C,327C,674C,908C 'attached':524C 'attention':111C 'audit':434C 'available':479C 'bad':724C 'based':689C 'be':167C,196C 'beats':72C 'because':378C,419C,628C,812C 'been':227C 'before':233C,319C,591C 'being':849C 'below':64C 'best':744C,855C 'best-known':743C 'better':112C 'beyond':173C 'bid':324C 'bids':320C 'big':765C,770C,872C 'big-box':871C 'both':518C,531C 'box':873C 'brand':136C,711C,754C,832C 'branded':241C 'brands':244C,399C,426C,785C 'budget':665C 'build':496C 'business':915C,921C 'by':34C,99C,272C,306C,356C,470C,671C,680C 'calendar':447C 'call':28B,283C,543C,578C,593C 'can':206C,456C 'candidate':20B,70C,264C,280C,511C,565C,826C 'candidates':614C 'cannot':189C,840C 'carries':374C,472C 'carrying':397C,783C 'case':124C,626C,877C 'caseload':14B,96C,107C,290C,373C,587C,904C 'caseloads':699C 'channel':103C,334C,357C 'check':599C 'choice':751C 'chose':639C 'claims':180C 'click':331C 'click-through':330C 'client':775C 'companies':177C 'compare':596C,913C 'comparison':549C,618C 'competitor':929 'competitor-analysis':928 'complete':891C 'content':672C 'conversation':371C 'conversion':328C 'correlated':706C 'correlates':662C 'cost':352C 'coverage':104C,335C 'criteria':13B,60C,95C 'criterion':270C,284C 'criticism':797C 'customer':354C 'data':237C 'depend':696C 'deserve':165C 'designed':789C 'determines':380C 'diagnosis':102C,318C 'directory':652C 'during':576C 'each':263C,269C,316C,345C 'economics':343C,695C 'editorial':666C 'efficient':504C 'either':844C 'else':115C,792C,902C 'ends':594C 'equal':473C 'evaluate':864C 'every':73C,454C,564C,825C 'everyone':759C,901C 'everything':313C 'exactly':170C 'excellent':395C 'exist':444C 'experience':403C 'experiences':713C 'factual':179C 'fastest':478C 'favor':691C 'fba':926 'fees':927 'figures':139C,521C,757C 'find':77C 'fit':820C 'fits':435C 'five':11B,58C,94C,341C,527C 'flapen':159C,234C,909C 'for':134C,169C,312C,344C,449C,517C,530C,585C,752C,790C,836C,859C 'frequently':748C 'from':123C,581C,882C 'full':433C 'gaps':443C 'get':53C 'gets':25B 'getting':192C 'give':207C,509C,563C 'guide':892C 'gut':605C 'happens':383C 'have':226C 'heaviest':15B,108C,376C 'hesitation':462C 'high':698C 'highest':602C 'hiring':218C,886C 'how':537C,545C,862C 'i':141C,147C,155C,188C,205C,225C,235C 'ideally':557C 'if':215C 'ignored':168C 'impressive':538C 'in':16B,300C,361C,445C,452C,459C,589C,619C,760C,809C 'including':827C 'industry':762C 'inside':776C 'instead':413C 'into':436C,441C 'invisible':808C 'is':32C,42C,129C,209C,222C,359C,389C,430C,463C,476C,525C,532C,560C,701C,729C,747C,794C,801C,807C,843C,906C 'it':39C,109C,379C,388C,458C,475C,725C,764C,800C 'itself':464C 'job':258C 'junior':781C 'justified':317C 'keep':911C 'known':745C 'knows':763C 'large':246C,692C 'largest':43C,127C,741C 'learning':912C 'likely':90C 'list':74C,146C 'listicles':667C 'lists':722C 'live':117C 'maintains':487C 'manager':293C,782C 'manages':484C 'many':784C 'margin':508C 'marketers':673C 'marketing':87C,664C,857C 'mature':501C 'maximum':358C 'means':717C,726C 'measure':83C,814C 'mechanisms':647C 'mediocre':406C 'memory':582C 'method':211C 'minutes':18B,68C,278C 'mislead':645C 'mismatch':803C,806C 'models':916C 'moonshot':243C 'most':704C,734C 'multiply':271C 'name':841C 'near':160C 'needs':492C,503C 'negatively':705C 'new':490C 'no':26B 'nobody':392C 'none':45C,648C,714C 'not':88C,122C,143C,296C,367C,579C,730C,737C,795C,848C 'nothing':420C 'notice':410C 'number':299C,391C,451C,529C,588C,905C 'numbers':315C,519C 'of':23B,46C,232C,256C,353C,414C,481C,536C,541C,555C,624C,649C,715C,798C,831C 'often':654C 'on':10B,93C,118C,228C,268C,281C,606C,697C,720C,896C 'one':133C,282C,310C,407C,438C,528C,552C,558C,842C 'only':339C 'operator':396C,428C 'or':40C,486C,658C,677C,847C 'ordered':33C 'ordering':679C,728C 'other':176C,230C,675C 'our':903C 'outcome':91C 'own':120C,684C 'paid':36C,656C 'part':255C 'partners':884C 'past':612C 'per':19B,69C,279C,291C,427C 'pick':551C 'placement':657C 'plans':416C 'points':287C,289C 'positioning':685C 'ppc':866C,923 'practice':362C 'predict':48C 'predicts':110C 'pricing':183C 'problems':411C 'process':788C 'produce':457C 'produces':400C,615C 'product':121C,307C,491C,502C,514C,554C,568C,611C 'products':338C 'proof':879C 'protect':507C 'publish':144C,156C,641C 'published':30C,81C,643C,907C 'publishes':393C 'put':158C 'question':224C 'questions':573C 'ran':236C 'rank':6B,54C,92C 'ranked':5A 'ranking':31C,154C,175C,499C,811C 'rankings':82C,644C,653C,690C,813C 'rarely':130C 'rather':439C,634C,817C 'reach':368C 'reading':625C,636C 'real':513C,553C 'reason':172C 'reasoning':101C,305C 'reasons':523C 'reassurance':412C 'receives':779C 'reflect':655C 'regardless':535C 'related':853C 'repeat':418C 'reporting':346C 'request':881C 'requires':178C 'responsiveness':607C 'rest':540C 'results':186C 'review':659C 'right':132C 'run':148C,423C,547C 'running':608C 's':86C 'sales':351C 'same':402C,567C,571C,610C,898C 'say':297C 'scandalous':651C 'score':116C,262C,466C,575C,894C 'scoring':62C,260C 'second':27B,370C,822C 'seconds':460C 'selecting':250C 'sellers':860C 'seven':138C,756C 'sharper':617C 'sheet':63C,261C,899C 'shipped':421C 'short':79C 'should':366C 'side':231C 'size':688C 'size-based':687C 'slow':408C 'small':710C,774C 'so':152C,461C 'someone':483C,791C 'spend':349C 'sponsored':337C 'staffing':184C 'stage':100C,308C,471C 'starts':322C,326C 'straight':850C 'structure':778C 'structured':768C 'studies':125C,627C 'study':878C 'suits':682C 'takes':65C 'target':311C 'technology':239C 'tell':738C 'terminating':252C 'test':480C 'than':113C,440C,622C,635C,818C 'that':171C,174C,187C,417C,559C,716C,777C,793C,839C 'the':61C,78C,84C,126C,131C,161C,210C,229C,257C,259C,273C,375C,390C,401C,450C,465C,477C,539C,542C,548C,566C,570C,577C,586C,592C,600C,609C,702C,718C,727C,740C,749C,805C,815C,819C,821C,890C,897C 'their':182C,683C 'them':55C,199C,488C,632C,650C,799C 'then':598C 'they':638C,833C 'thing':823C 'think':633C 'this':761C 'those':47C,193C,721C 'three':572C,613C,646C 'through':332C 'to':166C,198C,202C,266C,384C,409C,495C,506C,546C,640C,863C,870C,880C 'tools':678C 'top':1A,162C 'total':276C 'totals':597C 'traffic':333C 'transparency':105C,347C 'twelve':398C 'twenty':17B,67C,277C 'two':245C,314C,520C,601C 'type':830C 'under':21B,137C,302C,364C,755C 'underperforming':561C 'unfair':197C 'unusual':846C 'us':828C,895C 'use':214C 'useless':201C 'usually':669C 'value':918C 'variable':703C 'velocity':497C 'verify':190C 'version':80C 'very':845C 'volume':660C 'was':254C,544C 'watching':631C 'we':212C,216C,422C 'week':437C 'weeks':623C 'weight':106C,274C,285C,377C,474C 'weighted':12B,59C 'were':217C 'what':49C,204C,381C,637C,708C,733C 'whatever':442C,681C 'where':249C 'whether':482C 'which':221C,429C,661C,700C,829C 'who':35C,37C,41C 'whose':694C 'why':140C,372C,431C,467C,642C 'will':52C,76C,142C,295C,736C 'with':342C,522C,663C,707C,851C 'would':157C,164C,195C,213C 'writing':301C,453C,590C 'written':670C 'wrong':194C,750C,835C 'wrote':38C 'you':75C,203C,208C,629C,732C,739C,852C 'your':50C,89C,119C,385C,604C,919C 'yours':556C 'yourself':9B,56C 'zero':534C","2026-09-04T16:27:27.075028+00:00","2026-09-04T16:34:21.405627+00:00",[51,55,59],{"slug":52,"title":53,"published_at":54},"brand-tiers","Amazon brand management tiers: the complete guide","2026-09-04T16:33:51.798+00:00",{"slug":56,"title":57,"published_at":58},"done-for-you-management","Done-for-you Amazon management: the complete guide","2026-09-04T16:26:51.798+00:00",{"slug":60,"title":61,"published_at":62},"build-vs-buy","Build vs buy for your Amazon channel: the complete guide","2026-09-04T16:25:51.798+00:00",[],[65,66,70],{"slug":52,"title":53,"published_at":54},{"slug":67,"title":68,"published_at":69},"geography-and-marketplaces","Amazon marketplaces by geography: the complete guide","2026-09-04T16:32:51.798+00:00",{"slug":71,"title":72,"published_at":73},"measurement-and-audit","Amazon account measurement and audits: the complete guide","2026-09-04T16:31:51.798+00:00"]