Lusha vs Prospeo
 Lusha |  Prospeo | |
|---|---|---|
| Sentiment | ||
| Score | 43/100 | 12/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 | #8 |
| Rated comments | 21 | 9 |
| Best for | Individual reps doing occasional lookups on a budget; A secondary source alongside another database; Small teams starting on a free plan | Teams that will test it as one source alongside other finders |
| Skip it if | Enterprise or Fortune 500 prospecting; Large list building with fine-grained filters; Teams that cannot absorb bounces from unverified emails | Buyers who want to rely on Reddit testimonials to judge accuracy |
| Starting price | $37.45/mo | $37/user/mo |
| Pricing (vendor-stated) | Free plan with 40 credits per month. Paid plans per the pricing page's plan data: Starter $37.45/mo billed annually ($49.90 monthly) for 400 credits per month, Pro $52.45/mo annually ($69.90 monthly) for 600, Premium $299.95/mo annually ($399.90 monthly) for 3,400; Scale is custom. An email reveal costs 1 credit and a phone number 5. The page does not state whether prices are per user; teams above 5 users are sent to sales. No free trial beyond the free plan. | 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 see Lusha as a budget-friendly lookup tool that some find more accurate than Apollo for emails and phone numbers, useful as a second source or for one-off lookups. The trade-off is uneven accuracy (users report invented emails, invalid numbers and roughly 50/50 hit rates), thin coverage for enterprise and EMEA work, and weak filtering and credit terms. More than half of the Reddit mentions were promotional: one cluster of comments repeats 'Lusha for accuracy, Apollo for volume' in vendor terms, and many replies to Lusha complaints exist to plug alternatives (Bookyourdata, UpLead, ContactOut, FullEnrich and others), so this rests on about 21 independent opinions, most of them brief.
Users like
- Budget friendly, with free credits that make it easy to start and combine with Apollo[1][2][3]
- Some users find its emails and numbers more accurate than Apollo's or ZoomInfo's, though it returns fewer results[1][2][3][4]
- Phone numbers, including mobiles, work fairly well for some teams despite occasional misses[1][2]
- Useful as one of two sources: users pair it with Apollo, and one found it surfaced far more decision makers than Apollo for the same companies[1][2][3]
Users complain about
- Accuracy is unreliable for some: users report about 50/50 accuracy, invalid numbers that hurt domains, and one domain owner traced made-up email addresses sent to his company back to Lusha[1][2][3][4]
- Falls short against premium providers: it lost to ZoomInfo and Cognism in US and EMEA tests and was not enough for Fortune 500 IT prospecting[1][2][3]
- Filtering and user experience are weak, and one user calls the UX horrible enough to make it 2 to 3 times more expensive in practice[1]
- Credit terms frustrate users: no refunds for bad data, CRM saving gated on the first paid tier, and a search limit that appeared without notice[1][2]
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.