Arcads Pricing 2026: $110 Before Your First Clip, and About $11 a Video
Arcads starts at $110 a month with no free trial and no public pricing page. The plan structure, the credit rate behind it, and how to work out whether the per-video cost is worth it for you.
Arcads sells AI actors reading your ad script, aimed squarely at performance marketers testing UGC-style creative. It is the most expensive product in its bracket and the most opaque about why.
The plans
| Plan | Price | Videos | Effective per video |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | $110/month | ~10 | ~$11 |
| Creator | $220/month | ~20 | ~$11 |
| Pro | custom | unlimited, API, actor cloning | — |
Reported structure as of mid-2026. Three things to know before you sign up:
There is no public pricing page. The /pricing URL has been returning a 404 as of July 2026; plan details appear after you create an account.
There is no free trial. You pay $110 before generating a single clip. Among direct competitors this is unusual, and it is the most common complaint about the product.
No annual discount, no rollover. Starter and Creator are monthly only, credits do not carry over, and unused videos reset each cycle.
The credit rate underneath
The plans are a wrapper over a credit system that is not published openly. The reported rate is around 800 credits per minute per AI talking actor, and a typical 30–60 second UGC ad with one actor and captions consumes roughly 880 credits — which lands at about $11 per finished video at Creator rates.
That figure is worth holding onto, because it is the number to compare against everything else.
What $11 a video buys
A finished ad: an actor, a script read, captions, a vertical frame. No prompt engineering, no model selection, no assembly. For a performance marketer whose bottleneck is creative volume rather than budget, that packaging is the product, and $11 against a human creator's average of roughly $198 per deliverable is a real saving.
Actor cloning on the Pro tier is the feature that genuinely differentiates it — a consistent spokesperson across a campaign is hard to assemble from raw models.
What the same output costs closer to the metal
Per-second prices read live from fal.ai on 2 August 2026:
| Job | Endpoint | $/second | 30s ad |
|---|---|---|---|
| Talking presenter from a photo | alibaba/happy-horse/v1.1/image-to-video | $0.140 | $4.20 |
| Audio-driven presenter | fal-ai/bytedance/omnihuman/v1.5 | $0.160 | $4.80 |
| Presenter in a described scene | alibaba/happy-horse/v1.1/reference-to-video | $0.140 | $4.20 |
So roughly $4–5 in compute against $11 packaged. The gap is the assembly, the actor library and the interface — a fair margin, and a large one if you are producing at volume.
Who it suits
Yes: you run paid social at scale, creative volume is your constraint, and $110 a month is inside the noise of your ad spend. The per-video economics beat human UGC decisively for hook testing.
No: you are an individual creator, or you produce fewer than ten videos a month. Then you are paying $110 for capacity you will not use, with no trial to find that out first.
For the second case, per-clip pricing is the structure that fits — ours starts at $0.99 for a first video, and you can see the result before committing to anything. Arcads is not overpriced for a marketing team; it is priced for one.