LeadMagic vs Prospeo
 LeadMagic |  Prospeo | |
|---|---|---|
| Sentiment | ||
| Score | 68/100 | 12/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 | #15 |
| Rated comments | 21 | 9 |
| Best for | Budget teams running their own enrichment waterfall; Finding work emails and mobiles for contacts scraped from Apollo or LinkedIn; A second-pass check on unknown or failed emails | Teams that will test it as one source alongside other finders |
| Skip it if | Teams that need ZoomInfo-level coverage from one source; Senders who cannot add a separate catch-all verifier | Buyers who want to rely on Reddit testimonials to judge accuracy |
| Starting price | $83/mo | $37/user/mo |
| Pricing (vendor-stated) | Essential is $99/mo billed monthly for 5,000 credits, or $990/yr (about $83/mo); tiers run up to Ultimate at $849/mo for 100,000 credits, with Enterprise from $2,490/quarter. No free plan or free credits; a paid plan is required at signup, and failed lookups cost nothing. | Free plan with 100 credits a month. Paid plans are per user: Starter $49/mo monthly or $37/mo billed yearly (2,000 credits/mo), Growth $99 or $74 (5,000 credits/mo), Pro $249 or $187 (15,000 credits/mo). Yearly billing saves 25% and delivers credits upfront; larger credit volumes go through sales. |
Independent users describe LeadMagic as a cheap, pay-as-you-go email and mobile finder that slots into a waterfall, usually alongside Apollo or inside Clay, and that also works as a second-pass verifier. About 21 non-promotional comments carry an opinion, mostly brief and positive, centred on price and on finding emails and phones Apollo misses. The criticism is thinner but specific: one user says it has been failing them lately, and its handling of catch-all addresses is contested, with one user calling its 'valid catch-all' results unreliable and another praising its catch-all marking. Promotional comments are a smaller share than for most tools here, mostly plugs for other scrapers and verifiers plus a same-day cluster of Prospeo plugs, one of which knocks its mobile numbers.
Users like
- Cheap and pay-as-you-go; users call it the low-cost option for volume, one putting it at a tenth of Apollo's cost[1][2][3][4]
- Finds emails other sources miss, such as a contact's new address after a job change when Apollo still had the old one[1][2][3]
- Used for mobile numbers too, with users reporting better mobile coverage than Apollo[1][2][3]
- Doubles as a verifier: users run it as a second pass on unknown emails, then use its finder to replace invalid ones[1][2][3]
Users complain about
- One user says it charges for 'valid catch-all' results that are not reliable, forcing either lower coverage or a separate catch-all verifier (another user disputes this and praises its catch-all marking)[1]
- Consistency is questioned: one user says it has been failing them recently[1]
- Lacks the phones and emails that big databases like ZoomInfo collect from customer CRMs, so coverage trails them[1]
Most of the Prospeo discussion on Reddit is promotional: a large cluster of 'switched from ZoomInfo/Apollo/Lusha and bounces dropped' stories repeats the same talking points (connect rates, weekly refresh, pay only for verified), includes word-for-word duplicate comments from different accounts, and several users openly accuse the company of posting from fake accounts. Set that aside and independent evidence is thin and split: a few users rate it well as one source in a multi-tool stack, while others report a refund dispute or say it did not solve their data problem.