Adobe Campaign vs. Metadata.io

Multi-Channel Campaign Management: I have found Adobe Campaign to be excellent for managing campaigns across multiple channels, including email, mobile, social media, and web. Its centralized platform allows me to plan, execute, and track campaigns effectively, making it ideal for organizations with diverse marketing channels. For example, when I was running a campaign to promote a new product launch across email, SMS, and social media channels, Adobe Campaign provided me with the tools to orchestrate and track the campaign seamlessly. I could ensure consistent messaging and a cohesive customer experience across different channels.

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.

Incentivized

• What we like most about this application is that it provides us with the creation of ads to generate presence and impact on different channels at minimum cost.
• It has a section where [it] [helps] us determine our preferences in terms of marketing by private messaging and offer a report of actions.
• It also provides analysis with percentages to determine how many customers actually received our e-mail advertising.

Incentivized

• Best paid ops tool I've ever used (and I've used a lot): we can launch a new LinkedIn & Facebook campaign in minutes.
• Lead gen ops: no more dealing with broken zapier zaps, we are able to automate pushing native lead gen leads directly to our CRM.
• Attribution: see influenced & triggered opportunities/CW deals
• Multivariate testing: Metadata scales audience, ad, creative testing so you learn what performs much faster than manual process

Incentivized

• It requires administrator rights in order to deploy into an environment.
• We do not want changes directly in a production environment so deployments are a bottleneck since only a few have access.
• Performing user audits are difficult or even impossible in certain cases to determine who started/executed/made changes to a workflow.
• There's no easy way to roll back changes.

Incentivized

• It was difficult to set goals on the individual campaign level vs. all ad campaigns
• It seems like the automation in-platform is better than what Metadata provides so you can have better results running ads natively.
• They have some work to do to improve the user experience for running experiments because it is one of their best features but it's hard to use.

Incentivized

Despite the shortcomings of user interface and basic troubleshooting difficulty, Neolane is much more robust and delivers better capabilities to our sales and marketing staffs than any other product we have used here or any product our staff members have used at other locations.

Thanks to this tool we are taking more internal control of the creation and deployment of campaigns with less dependency on an ESP. We can pre-program marketing publications, being able to concentrate on the target audience. It helps me manage email campaigns with real-time tracking.

Aside from frequent error prompts, the program is quite dependable

Although there is a lot of material available on the internet to answer questions, I still feel a lack of commitment and delay in the responses of the support, but as a whole, it leaves nothing to be desired. I believe that, in the great majority, companies sin in the desired support, but we cannot generalize. But this one, in particular, has a wide range of specialists and well-qualified management, but I believe that it is not so bad.

Metadata's customer support is a difference-maker! They really do care how well your campaigns perform and will help you improve them.

Incentivized

Sender also offers multi-channel marketing capabilities, allowing users to engage with their audience through different channels. However, the range and depth of multi-channel capabilities in Adobe Campaign are generally more extensive. So after using both the platforms I selected Adobe Campaign for my email marketing purpose.

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 features like personalized landing pages and resource hubs specific to target companies which have the potential to be really effective. I evaluated Influ2. They seem to be really great at targeting a person level across channels. So you can run a campaign to an audience as small as 1-5 people at a specific company using various targeting methods including email upload. Metadata can't get this granular.

Incentivized

• Adobe Campaign has boosted our ROI, with a 700% increase in the last month of using the service. These results are very favorable, and we will continue to use the service.
• Adobe Campaign makes it easy to calculate the proposed ROI on a monthly basis, as it constantly lets us evaluate and compare the growth of our earnings in relation to previous ones.

Incentivized

• 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

Incentivized