Pricing Guide
Realeyes sits on the measurement side of attention testing — real viewers, webcams, facial coding — which means every study buys real fieldwork. No public rate card, and there structurally couldn't be a cheap one. Here's what shapes the quote and how to decide if observed emotion is what your decision actually needs.
Opt-in panelists watch your ad on camera; computer vision reads attention and emotional expression from their faces. Every study therefore carries recruitment, compensation, and processing costs that scale with sample size, markets, and the number of creatives tested — quoted per study or as program contracts through enterprise sales. You're buying observation, and observation has a floor price that prediction doesn't.
What sample size per creative does the quote assume, and what does adding variants cost? Which markets, and what's fielding turnaround in each? Per-study pricing or a program commitment — and what does unused scope do at term end? The strategic one: which of your creative decisions genuinely require observed human reaction, versus the attention gate-check a model covers for a couple of dollars before the study?
When stakeholders need human-observed evidence: hero creative validation, emotion measurement feeding brand strategy, or media/platform research programs at scale. Facial coding's claim — real faces, really reacting — is one a prediction model honestly can't make, and for some decisions that authenticity is the requirement. The comparison set at that tier: Realeyes alternatives, and PreTestAds vs Realeyes for the observed-vs-predicted split in detail.
If the recurring decision is which cuts get budget this week, study economics can't cover the volume — and don't need to. AdCortex™, trained on fMRI brain-response data, predicts the attention side self-serve: $49/month for 20 analyses (about $2.45 each), packs from $45, up to 8 free credits, minutes per result, benchmarked against 76 public top performers. Screen everything, send the finalists that need observed emotion to the panel — the same sequencing logic as live testing.
Score an ad in minutes — up to 8 free credits, no credit card, no fieldwork window.
Test Your Ad Freeor read a live sample report first — no signup
Realeyes doesn't publish prices. It measures attention and emotion from opt-in webcam panels — real people, recruited and compensated per study — so quotes carry fieldwork economics: shaped by sample size, markets, number of creatives, and program scope, sold through a sales process to enterprise buyers.
Because measurement recruits humans and prediction doesn't. Facial coding observes real viewers' faces — recruiting, compensating, and processing panels per study. A prediction model has no per-test panel, which is why attention screening lands at about $2.45 per test with results in minutes. Observed emotion versus predicted attention is the real trade.
When observed human reaction is the requirement: validating finished hero creative, measuring emotion for brand decisions, or research programs where 'a model predicted it' won't satisfy stakeholders. For ranking weekly cuts on watchability, screening-tier economics fit better — and many teams run both in sequence.