Lusha vs ZoomInfo
 Lusha |  ZoomInfo | |
|---|---|---|
| Sentiment | ||
| Score | 43/100 | 42/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 | #2 |
| Rated comments | 21 | 39 |
| Best for | Individual reps doing occasional lookups on a budget; A secondary source alongside another database; Small teams starting on a free plan | Enterprise and US-focused prospecting; Teams that cold call mobile numbers at volume; Companies with budget for an annual contract |
| Skip it if | Enterprise or Fortune 500 prospecting; Large list building with fine-grained filters; Teams that cannot absorb bounces from unverified emails | Small teams and early-stage startups on a budget; Teams that rely on intent data to source pipeline; Europe-first prospecting |
| 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. | Sales-led pricing; no public prices. Sales plans (Professional, Copilot Advanced, Copilot Enterprise) and marketing plans are quoted based on features, number of licenses and credit usage, with payment terms negotiated. Free trial offered on sales plans; no free plan. |
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]
Independent users mostly rank ZoomInfo as the most complete contact database, especially for US and enterprise prospecting and mobile numbers, and teams that moved over from cheaper tools such as Seamless report a clear difference. The trade-off is price, contract and cancellation terms that users find aggressive, and data that is still often wrong; several reps say emails, numbers and org charts miss badly and that its intent features rarely produce pipeline. Discussion is broad, with about 40 independent opinions; about a fifth of mentions were set aside as promotional, including comments from ZoomInfo staff, a Prospeo seeding cluster and an identical Cognism pitch posted by two accounts.
Users like
- Teams that moved from Seamless, Slintel or Apollo report noticeably more accurate and thorough data, and one team returned to ZoomInfo after trialing Seamless[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]
- Strongest for US and enterprise accounts: users call it the best fit for Fortune 500 prospecting and say calling enterprises without it leaves you stuck[1][2][3]
- Mobile numbers are the main draw for callers; one rep gets a mobile about 75% of the time, while noting it is far from perfect[1][2][3][4]
- Integrations add value: CRM and call-recording tie-ins surface decision makers before calls, and reps connect it to Salesforce and AI assistants for account research[1][2]
Users complain about
- Expensive: users call it ridiculously or prohibitively priced, question the premium given its errors, advise negotiating hard, and say reps at some companies buy other tools because it is so enterprise-focused[1][2][3][4][5]
- Data is still often wrong: reps report bad emails, wrong phone numbers, off-base org charts, catch-all addresses and connect rates under 1% for one team[1][2][3][4][5][6]
- Intent and pickup-likelihood signals are seen as unreliable: users call intent smoke and mirrors and say a 'more likely to pick up' list was still mostly cold[1][2][3]
- Contract and sales practices draw complaints: sketchy legal language and a trigger-happy legal team at cancellation, plus persistent sales calls after prospects say no[1][2][3][4]