SaaS content marketing agency
Content for B2B SaaS and fintech that is mapped to pipeline, sourced before it is written, and built from what your own people know — so it ranks, gets cited, and survives review without being edited down to nothing.
Start the Acquisition Audit — $2,500 Read what we publish
Fixed fee · two weeks · credited in full to your first month
Who this is for
Most SaaS content marketing services are built for speed: a brief, a freelancer, a publish button. That works until the product touches money, data or regulation. Then somebody on your side has to read every sentence, and a programme built for speed turns into a queue of drafts nobody will approve.
In the US and the UK we work with companies between $1M and $20M ARR. In Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Ghana the range is $150K–$5M, and the entry point is the Acquisition Audit, sold standalone. Prices are published.
What actually goes wrong
A capable generalist can summarise the top ten results for any keyword. That is exactly what Google’s own guidance tells you to be suspicious of, and exactly what your buyers skim past. The piece is accurate, forgettable, and indistinguishable from the competitor’s.
The draft arrives with confident, unsourced claims. Your reviewer strikes them. What is left is safe and vague, and vague content does not rank against anyone who was allowed to be specific. Next month the same argument happens again.
Articles are chosen because the keyword looked easy, not because a buyer reading them is one click from your pricing or comparison page. Traffic arrives, reads, and leaves. The calendar is full and the pipeline is not.
What we actually do
One process for every piece: decide what it is for, get the knowledge out of your team, source every claim, then write. The order is what makes it pass review and what makes it rank.
Keyword research against the questions your sales calls actually hear, clustered so every article has a named commercial parent — a category, comparison, integration or pricing page. Bottom-of-funnel pieces first, because they are the ones that turn into meetings.
A short monthly interview with a founder, product lead or customer-facing specialist. That is where the details come from that a competitor cannot copy: how implementation really goes, what customers ask in the third call, what the regulator actually looks at.
Each factual statement is listed with its primary source and the date it was checked, before a word of the draft exists. Your reviewer sees the evidence first and approves a claim, rather than rewriting a paragraph. Where something cannot be sourced, the piece says so.
Four pieces a month on Foundation, eight on Compound, each with a named author, dated sources, and the structure a busy reader and an AI answer engine can both lift from. See the register of what we publish for the standard.
Drafts go to your reviewer in scheduled batches, sources attached, changes tracked. Approved wording is logged as precedent, so the next cycle starts from what was already agreed rather than from scratch.
Dated claims are re-checked every quarter. Pieces with impressions and no clicks are rewritten against what they actually picked up; pieces with neither after a fair window are merged into something that works. A content library is maintained, not just added to.
The rules we work to
Google’s guidance says its systems give extra weight to content showing experience, expertise, authoritativeness and trust on topics that could significantly affect people’s financial stability — “Your Money or Your Life” topics — and that of those, trust matters most. It also lists warning signs, among them content made primarily to attract search visits, lots of content on many different topics in the hope some of it performs, and content that mainly summarises what others have said without adding much value.
Google’s spam policies define scaled content abuse as generating many pages primarily to manipulate rankings rather than help users, “no matter how it’s created” — and give using generative AI to produce many pages without adding value, and stitching together content from other pages, as examples. The tool is not the problem. Pages that add nothing are.
In practice that means named authors with real credentials, sources a reader can check, dates on anything that changes, and nothing that outruns its evidence. It is also, not by coincidence, what a compliance reviewer asks for.
| Stage | What happens | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Brief | Keyword, intent, commercial parent and the question the piece must answer, agreed before anything else | No piece exists without a reason a buyer would read it |
| Interview | Twenty minutes with your specialist, recorded and transcribed | The detail a competitor cannot copy |
| Claims log | Every factual claim listed with its primary source and check date | The reviewer approves evidence, not prose |
| Draft | Written against the log, with approved wording for anything regulated | The sentences most likely to be struck are never improvised |
| Review | Batched to your reviewer with a turnaround, changes tracked | Review becomes a queue, not an interruption |
| Publish | Schema, internal links to the parent page, indexing request | The piece is found, and it passes authority to a page that sells |
The first 90 days
Content audit of what you already have, keyword and demand map, the first interviews, and a claims log started. The commercial pages each cluster will support are named, and gaps in them are flagged.
The first bottom-of-funnel pieces are drafted against the claims log and go to your reviewer as one batch. Whatever gets struck, and why, becomes a rule for every piece after it.
The programme runs at its monthly cadence, internal links point at the commercial parents, and we report on the day-90 indicators agreed in month one — including which pieces to cut.
How it is measured
| When | What should be true | What it tells you |
|---|---|---|
| Day 30 | Content map agreed, first interviews done, tracking from article to CRM opportunity live | Whether we will be able to prove anything later |
| Day 90 | First pieces live and indexed; review turnaround measured and falling | Whether the process holds up under your review |
| Day 180 | Impressions on the commercial terms targeted; assisted conversions from content visible in the CRM | Whether content is reaching buyers, not just readers |
| Month 9–12 | Content-assisted pipeline and revenue, reported against cost | Whether it paid for itself, on your sales cycle |
Proof
Momentum AdWorks is a specialist practice, not a large agency. Where a result below came from a prior role rather than a Momentum engagement, it says so.
Case studies written for a US investment platform, used by its sales team to close investors, alongside organic sessions up 40%. Prior role. Read the case study
Qualified investor engagement for the same platform, from a programme built on 150+ high-intent keywords. Prior role.
With keyword coverage up 50%, for a US marketing agency. Agency role. Read the case study
Everything on our own blog is written the way this page describes: every regulatory claim cites a primary source with the date it was checked. Our own site’s progress from a standing start is logged on the results page.
Pricing
Published, fixed, and never priced by the word. Content sits inside every retainer; the tier decides how much of it, and what runs alongside.
Four content pieces a month, technical SEO, compliance review on everything, tracking built right. $1M–$3M ARR.
Eight pieces a month, SEO and paid as one motion, landing pages, digital PR and link acquisition. $3M–$10M ARR.
Everything in Compound at depth, across multiple markets and products, including programmatic page programmes. $10M–$20M ARR.
Every engagement starts with the Acquisition Audit — $2,500, two weeks, credited to your first month. Full detail and the exclusions are on the pricing page.
Questions
It plans, writes and maintains the content that brings buyers to your site and moves them towards a demo or trial. Done well, that means a content map tied to your commercial pages, interviews with your own specialists, sourced claims, and a refresh schedule — not just a stream of blog posts.
Four on Foundation and eight on Compound. We would rather publish four pieces a specialist would forward than twenty nobody remembers, and Google’s guidance points the same way.
We use tools where they help — transcription, research, checking — but every piece is built on an interview with your team and a sourced claims log, and a person is accountable for every sentence. Google’s spam policies target pages that add no value however they are made, and that is the line we hold.
As a scheduled reviewer with a queue. Claims are sourced before drafting, drafts arrive in batches with the evidence attached, and approved wording is logged so each cycle is faster than the last.
Bottom-of-funnel pieces can pick up impressions within weeks of being indexed. Rankings on competitive terms usually take three to six months, and pipeline follows your sales cycle on top of that.
From $3,500 a month for four pieces with technical SEO and compliance review, after a $2,500 Acquisition Audit that is credited to the first month. We never price by the word.
On Compound and Scale, yes: reference assets, expert commentary and digital PR. See our SaaS link building page for how, and what we will not do.
Next
Two weeks, $2,500, credited against your first month if you continue. You get a technical and content SEO audit, a paid-account and compliance-risk review, a keyword and demand map showing who owns the demand in your category, a tracking gap analysis, and a prioritised 90-day plan — yours to execute with us or without us.
Start the Acquisition Audit Tell us about your content
We reply within one working day. Related: SaaS SEO agency · SaaS link building.