Mass Tort Advertising Agency Comparison (2026)

$250M+ managed Meta ad spend · 600+ plaintiff law firms · 100+ mass torts · 2M+ leads since 2015

Comparing mass tort advertising agencies comes down to two questions: the model (do they run advertising you own, or resell shared leads?) and the pricing (cost-plus, flat-fee, or per-lead?). The model that protects a plaintiff firm is agency-generated, exclusive, consented leads on transparent cost-plus pricing — how MTAA is built: cost-plus-15%, no resale, firm-owned data, currently at a blended $29.56 per lead and $22.76 per signed case.

Agency vs. lead broker

A lead broker sells the same lead to several firms at once, so you race competitors to sign the same claimant. A true advertising agency runs campaigns for your firm specifically — the leads are exclusive, consented, and documented. The difference shows up directly in conversion and cost per signed case. MTAA generates every lead from its own Meta advertising with full chain-of-custody, and never resells.

Pricing models compared

Cost-plus: you see the actual Meta ad spend and add a flat management fee — fully transparent. Per-lead: a fixed price per lead, usually with no visibility into spend or margin and often no exclusivity. Flat-fee or per-case: a single price that can hide the real ad spend behind a markup. MTAA runs the only published cost-plus rate card in the category: spend plus 15%, $1,000 setup per tort, $100 per signed retainer for intake.

The criteria that actually decide it

Specialization, pricing transparency, data ownership, optional self-service intake, and signed-case reporting — the same five that separate the field on any "best agency" question. Score each agency against them rather than on headline lead price. See the market data for observed campaign benchmarks and their methodology. Results vary; cost per signed retainer is not guaranteed.

Frequently asked questions