inCast is an influencer and experiential marketing agency with offices in Los Angeles and Sao Paulo, founded in 2015. It has engaged more than 6,000 creators across 180-plus clients and it pairs digital campaigns with branded physical experiences.
That mix of online and on-the-ground is its signature, backed by proprietary tools like its Rainmakr app and Funcast experiences. For brands that want creators and events together, it is distinctive. Here is the honest read.
The verdict
inCast is a strong pick if you want influencer marketing and real-world activations from one team, especially across US and Brazilian audiences. The experiential angle sets it apart from agencies that only ever touch the feed.
The trade-offs are familiar. Pricing is undisclosed, it is a fully managed service and its reach is concentrated in two regions. If you want transparent costs, direct control or a tool you run yourself, it is not the natural fit.
What inCast does
inCast covers strategy, direct creator bookings and branded experiences as a managed agency. Its proprietary Rainmakr app supports creator matching, while Funcast handles the experiential side, the events and activations that turn a campaign into something people show up to.
It works across Instagram, YouTube and TikTok alongside physical experiences, with particular strength bridging the US and Brazil. That cross-market, online-plus-offline reach is what most rivals cannot offer in one package.
Pricing
inCast does not publish pricing. As a managed agency running both digital and experiential work, it quotes per project, so the cost depends heavily on whether you are running a social campaign, a live activation or both.
Expect agency-level budgets, with experiential work adding production costs on top. That makes it a considered spend rather than a quick self-serve buy and it is the main reason lean teams compare software instead.
Pros and cons
The short version, weighed up:
| Strengths | Watch-outs |
|---|---|
| Influencer plus experiential in one team | Pricing is undisclosed, project-based |
| Strong US and Brazil reach | Concentrated in two regions |
| Proprietary Rainmakr and Funcast tools | Fully managed, less direct control |
| 6,000+ creators, 180+ clients | Experiential adds production cost |
Who it is for
inCast fits brands that want creators and live experiences together, particularly those targeting US or Brazilian audiences, with budget for a managed program. If events are part of your plan, few agencies pair them with influencer work as naturally.
It is a weaker fit if you only need digital discovery, want prices upfront or sell mainly outside its core regions. Those needs point toward a self-serve platform rather than an experiential agency.
How it compares to Flinque
inCast runs managed campaigns and events for you. Flinque does something narrower and cheaper: it lets your team find and vet creators directly. Where inCast quotes per project and handles execution, Flinque gives you 10M verified creators across four platforms at published prices from free to $150 a month, with a fake-follower check on each.
They suit different needs. For influencer-plus-experiential campaigns in the US and Brazil, inCast fits. For finding and vetting creators yourself, anywhere, at a price you can read, Flinque is faster and far cheaper. A common pattern is to use Flinque for discovery and an agency like inCast only when you need live activations.
When experiential earns its cost
inCast's experiential side is what sets it apart but live experiences cost more than a feed post, so it helps to know when they are worth it. The short answer: when physical presence changes behaviour, like a product people need to touch, a launch that benefits from a moment or a community that gathers in person.
Pairing creators with events compounds both. The creators draw people to the activation and the activation gives the creators something real to post, so the content feels lived rather than staged. That loop is hard to fake with a feed-only campaign.
inCast's reach across the US and Brazil makes this especially useful for brands bridging those markets, where on-the-ground culture matters and a remote agency would miss the nuance. Its Funcast arm exists specifically to run that experiential layer.
If experiences are not part of your plan, though, you are paying for capability you will not use. In that case a discovery tool for the creator side, at a flat price, covers the digital half without the production overhead.
Before you sign inCast for an experiential push, pressure-test whether the event actually changes behaviour or just looks good in a recap. The best activations give people a reason to act on the spot and give creators something genuine to film, so the spend works twice. If you cannot point to that double payoff, you are buying production for its own sake. For purely digital programs the maths rarely favours an experiential agency and a flat-price discovery tool plus your own paid media will stretch the budget considerably further.
The takeaway
inCast is a distinctive agency for brands that want influencer marketing and real-world experiences together, with genuine reach across the US and Brazil. The opaque pricing and regional focus are the trade-offs, as with most managed shops.
Whether you hire it or not, the first move is the same: find real creators and confirm their audiences are genuine before you spend.
Want to find and vet creators yourself? Try Flinque free and check every audience at a flat price.