Trusted by the fastest growing B2B companies
★
4.8 on G2
G2
Many Lusha customers switch when credits keep getting consumed on data that doesn't work. FullEnrich runs every lookup through 20+ data providers and only charges when a verified email or phone is returned, with unlimited users on every plan.
Get started for free →
The fundamental difference is structural. Lusha owns a 280-million-contact database. FullEnrich queries 20+ data providers per request. Everything else on this page flows from that single architectural choice.
Lusha wins where speed beats coverage. The Chrome extension is the fastest in the category, the brand is well-known, and a new SDR is productive on day one. For one rep clicking through LinkedIn profiles, it's the right tool.
FullEnrich wins on cost-per-verified-contact. Each lookup runs through 20+ providers in waterfall, charges only on verified hits, and holds up in regions where Lusha's coverage thins out. Failed lookups cost nothing, and unlimited users come with every plan.
Based on verified G2 reviews, Reddit feedback, and conversations with teams who've made the move.
Lusha is one proprietary database. FullEnrich queries 20+ data providers in parallel per lookup (Hunter, ContactOut, RocketReach, Datagma, Apollo and more), auto-routes to the best provider for each lead's region, and recovers up to 80% of catch-all email addresses other tools skip.
Lusha charges credits whether the email bounces or the phone is wrong. FullEnrich charges 1 credit per verified email and 10 per verified mobile. Failed lookups cost zero. Add unlimited users on every plan and credits that roll over for 12 months on annual, and the math works out roughly nine times cheaper for a 10-person team.
FullEnrich is more than a tool. It is the data layer behind 50+ AI agents and platforms, including 11x. While Lusha exposes one MCP integration for Claude, FullEnrich runs the API stack that AI products call when they need verified contact data at scale.
Real features. Real prices. We show where Lusha wins, too.
FullEnrich does not own a contact database. Each time you submit a name and company, the platform fans the request out to 20+ data providers in parallel (Datagma, Dropcontact, Hunter, Apollo, Prospeo, and more), runs triple email verification including catch-all detection, and returns the first verified hit. Results are cached for 3 months to avoid repeat charges, then discarded. Nothing is persistently stored as a queryable database.
Lusha owns a 280-million-contact proprietary database: 152M emails and 280M direct-dial phones. The data comes from a community contribution program, third-party brokers and licensed business directories, public sources, an internal pattern-inference algorithm, and LinkedIn profile reads via the Chrome extension. Lusha refreshes daily, holds end-user data for up to 3 years following last activity, and offers a public opt-out portal.
The architectural choice has compliance, accuracy, and pricing consequences. Lusha's depth is unmatched for ad-hoc lookups in US and UK mid-market, especially via the Chrome extension. FullEnrich's fan-out architecture means coverage stacks across regions where any single source thins out, and EU contacts aren't sitting in a queryable bank waiting to be discovered.
Compliance for B2B contact data isn't really about which certifications hang on the wall. It's about how the data is sourced, stored, and made available when a regulator asks.
Lusha holds the broadest cert stack in the category: SOC 2 Type II, GDPR via ePrivacyseal, CCPA via TrustArc, ISO 27001, ISO 27701, ISO 31700, TRUSTe Responsible AI. The privacy team completes opt-out requests in under 4 days mean response, and named EU/UK representatives sit at Prighter. The structural risk: Lusha owns a 280-million-contact database. EU citizens regularly discover their data inside without prior notification. France's CNIL issued a formal warning in 2020, and similar friction continues in Germany and the Netherlands.
FullEnrich takes a different bet: don't store the database. Each lookup is fetched on-demand from 20+ providers, returned to the user, and held in a 3-month cache before being discarded. There is no queryable bank of EU contacts to discover. SOC 2 Type II is in place, GDPR and CCPA are aligned, and there is no regulatory action history to disclose.
For RevOps and procurement teams reviewing data vendors, the question shifts from "which certifications do they hold?" to "what's the structural exposure if a regulator calls?" Cert breadth matters. Architectural minimalism matters more.
We are transparent about where Lusha wins, and where waterfall enrichment is the smarter choice.
On average, FullEnrich finds 35% more contacts than single-source providers. Teams switch and stop paying for data they can't use.
Guideflow achieved 37% pipeline growth after switching to waterfall enrichment.
Real reviews from the last six months. Not marketing copy.
Here's who each is actually built for.
Learn why querying 20+ data providers finds contacts that Lusha's single database misses, and how teams cut their enrichment cost while improving accuracy.