Compare

LaunchSign vs Filestage: which one for campaign approval?

Filestage is general-purpose review and approval software. LaunchSign is campaign production and approval software. If your work is collecting feedback on individual files, a video cut, packaging artwork, a 40-page deck, Filestage does that better and with broader format coverage. If your work is getting a multichannel campaign from brief to client sign-off, with production status per asset and one approval on the whole thing, that is a different problem and it is the one LaunchSign was built for.

Both tools let a client comment without creating an account. Both keep version history. The difference is what they treat as the unit of work: a file, or a campaign.

What does Filestage actually do?

Filestage is online proofing. You create a project, upload files, and invite reviewers to comment and approve. Reviewers can pin comments to a specific point on an image, a timestamp in a video, a line in a document. They don’t need an account, just an email address.

Its file-type coverage is wide: video, audio, images, design files, PDFs, live websites, and interactive HTML. Approval routing runs through reviewer groups, which act as sequential stages, so a file can pass internal review before it reaches the client.

Pricing on their site is flat per month rather than per seat. Free covers 1 active project and 5 new files a month. Starter is $199/month with unlimited projects and files, version comparison, team-only comments, and password-protected links. Business is $329/month and adds automations, AI review agents, project templates, comment labels, external partner uploads, and exportable PDF review reports. Reviewer groups are capped at 2 on Free and Starter and 3 on Business, with unlimited groups on Enterprise. Every plan includes 10 seats, with extra seats sold in bundles of 5.

Where does Filestage win?

Three places, clearly.

One-off file reviews. If someone needs eyes on Q3_brand_video_v4.mp4 by Thursday, Filestage is faster to set up. Upload, share a link, done. There is no campaign structure to fill in first.

Format range. Video with timestamped comments, audio, InDesign artwork, packaging labels, print collateral. LaunchSign does not compete here and is not trying to. If print and video are a real part of your output, that matters.

Maturity. Filestage has been in this category for years, with customers like Sixt, Sharp, and Ogilvy on their site, plus SOC-adjacent security documentation, SSO, and a Germany data residency option on Enterprise. If your procurement team wants a vendor with a track record and a trust center, that is a legitimate reason to pick it. LaunchSign is newer and does not pretend otherwise.

If your review problem is genuinely file-shaped, buy Filestage and stop reading.

What breaks when you approve a campaign as eight separate files?

Here is the specific failure. Black Friday campaign: three emails, two SMS, one WhatsApp message, one landing page. Ten deliverables once you count subject line variants.

In a file-review tool, that becomes a project folder. bf_email1_teaser_v3.html, bf_email2_launch_v2.html, bf_sms_day1.docx, bf_lp_hero_v5.png. Each one gets its own comment thread and its own approve button. Your client clicks approve eight times over nine days.

At the end you have eight approved files. What you do not have:

• A record that the campaign was approved. Nobody signed off on the whole thing. There is no artifact you can point to in February when the client says the WhatsApp message was never agreed.
• Any view of where each asset is in production. A file sitting in the folder could be waiting on copy, waiting on design, waiting on the developer to build the HTML, or waiting on QA. The folder does not know. Your project manager tracks it in a spreadsheet.
• Sequence. The teaser email goes out three days before the launch email, and the SMS fires only to non-openers. That logic lives in someone’s head or in a Miro board that stopped matching reality after the second revision round.
• Any link between assets. Email 2 reuses the hero image from email 1. Approving one and revising the other creates a mismatch nobody catches until send day.

A campaign is not a folder of files. Approving eight assets separately is not approving a campaign.

What does LaunchSign do differently?

LaunchSign starts from the campaign and works down.

A campaign opens as a visual journey canvas: nodes for each message, wait steps, and conditional splits, laid out in send order. The journey is the map, so the sequence is documented rather than remembered.

Each content node carries a production pipeline of its own: copy, design, markup, QA, each with a status, an assigned owner, and a brief. Open the workbench for an email node and you see which phase is in progress, which are blocked, and who is holding each one. A campaign PM can answer “where is the day-2 SMS” without asking anyone.

Client review happens in rounds against a frozen set of deliverables, so the reviewer never lands on material that changed after the link was sent. Pinned comments and the verdict for the round are recorded together, with actor and timestamp.

And there is a campaign-level sign-off: one act, separate from the per-asset approvals, where the client approves the full journey before launch. That produces the artifact the folder never had, with a line like “Approved 7/14/2026 by Carlos Fernandez” attached to it.

One thing to be clear about: LaunchSign sits between the brief and the platform your team already uses to build and send campaigns. It does not connect to Klaviyo, SFMC, or HubSpot and does not send anything. You build in your email platform as you always did. For email markup, you point that platform’s native test send at a unique address LaunchSign generates for that deliverable, and the received HTML becomes the version under review. No API, no credentials, no integration to maintain. Email client previews (how each email renders across Outlook, Gmail and Apple Mail in light and dark) are included on Pro, rendered against the same version your client is reviewing.

Seat math is worth checking against your team size. Filestage includes 10 seats and sells more in bundles of 5. LaunchSign’s paid plan does not meter seats, campaigns, or workspaces, which changes the arithmetic if you have 18 people touching campaigns. Current numbers are on the LaunchSign pricing page and on theirs.

Which one should you pick?

Pick Filestage if reviews are file-shaped, formats are varied, and video or print is part of the mix.

Pick LaunchSign if the recurring pain is a campaign in flight: eight deliverables, four owners, a client who approved “the emails” but not the SMS, and no single place that shows the state of the whole thing.

If you are also evaluating Ziflow, the split is similar and we wrote it up in LaunchSign vs Ziflow. Ziflow goes deeper than Filestage on compliance and print, and the campaign-versus-asset question lands the same way.

Want to see the journey canvas, the per-asset pipeline, and the sign-off trail against one of your own campaigns?