Insurance agents running paid advertising face a fundamental creative choice: video or image? Both formats work. Both have real strengths. The right answer depends on your budget, your production capacity, your traffic source, and where your prospects are in the decision journey. IAM has tested thousands of video and image ad creatives for insurance clients since 2019 — across Medicare supplement, final expense, Medicare Advantage, and ACA campaigns. This comparison breaks down what the data actually shows, not what platform reps tell you to run.
Get Professional Guidance →Best For
Agents spending $3,000+/month with a library of 5–10 pre-produced videos and strong retargeting setup
Estimated Cost
$18–$32/lead at scale (lower after retargeting audience builds)
Best For
Agents under $3,000/month, testing new markets or messaging, or building initial audience data
Estimated Cost
$22–$40/lead (higher effective CPL when lead quality adjusted)
For insurance agents with the production capacity, video wins on CPL and lead quality at scale. IAM's data shows that video leads — particularly from agents or real clients speaking on camera — have 20–35% higher close rates than image leads from equivalent campaigns. The trust component that video builds before the phone call is measurable. However, image ads are not inferior by default: they're faster to produce, easier to iterate, and work well for agents testing new markets or messages. The optimal strategy for agents spending $3,000+/month is a video-primary campaign (3–5 video creatives refreshed monthly) running alongside an image retargeting campaign. Under $3,000/month, image ads with strong headlines and a systematic A/B testing process outperform video because the production investment is hard to justify at lower spend levels.
Recommendation: Start with image ads
Why: At this budget, production investment in video is hard to justify. Use image ads to build initial audience data, test messaging, and identify winning headlines. Once you're spending $2,000+/month with proven messaging, invest in a 3-video set.
Recommendation: Video-primary strategy with image retargeting
Why: At this spend level, a 20–35% improvement in close rate from video-warmed leads has a significant dollar impact. Produce 2–3 new video variations monthly, run them to cold audiences, and use image carousels for retargeting the video viewer audience at lower CPL.
Recommendation: Video for YouTube and Facebook, image for Google Display
Why: Google Display is a visual-interruption format where simple, bold image ads with high contrast outperform video. YouTube and Facebook are consumption environments where video storytelling performs. Match the creative format to the platform's consumption context.
Recommendation: UGC-style video or client testimonial video, with image ads as backup
Why: You don't need to be on camera. Client testimonial videos (even shot on iPhone) outperform polished agent videos in many tests. Consider hiring a local actor or using a UGC creator. If video isn't feasible, focus on high-converting image ads with strong social proof and clear rate-comparison CTAs.
Get a personalized recommendation from our insurance marketing experts — free consultation.
Get Free Marketing Strategy →On Facebook/Meta at scale ($3,000+/month), yes — but the mechanism is nuanced. Raw CPL from video campaigns is often similar to image (sometimes slightly higher) because video CPMs are higher. However, video leads have higher close rates (20–35% better in IAM's client data) because the prospect arrives having seen and heard the agent. When you calculate cost per issued policy rather than CPL, video typically wins at scale. At lower budgets, the CPM premium for video can make image more cost-efficient.