Enrichley vs GetProspect: Which One Should You Use in 2026?
You've got a list of 5,000 contacts, you're about to launch a cold email sequence, and you suspect a chunk of those addresses will bounce. The real question in the Enrichley vs GetProspect debate isn't which tool is "better" - it's whether you need a verification scalpel or a prospecting Swiss Army knife. They answer that question very differently.
30-Second Verdict
Use Enrichley if you already have contacts and need to clean them - especially catch-all domains that many verifiers label "unknown" and punt on. Strong economics at scale.
Use GetProspect if you need to find emails and want a Chrome extension workflow with a simple, credit-efficient billing model. Just know the verified match rate hovers around 62-65%.
Skip both if you're an outbound agency running 10+ client campaigns and can't afford to stitch a finder and verifier together. Prospeo covers both - 300M+ profiles, 98% email accuracy, and a free tier to test it.
What You're Actually Comparing
These tools solve different problems.
Enrichley is a verification specialist: you hand it emails, and it tells you which are safe to send - including catch-all addresses that many verifiers label "unknown." GetProspect is a prospecting platform: it finds emails, offers a Chrome extension, and supports team workflows with workspaces, exports, and add-ons like Google Sheets enrichment.
The overlap is thin. Comparing them head-to-head only makes sense if you're deciding which type of tool to invest in first.
Enrichley at a Glance
Enrichley is a small, focused operation - $770K in revenue with a 7-person team. It has zero user reviews on GetApp, which tells you something about its market presence. But it has a clear niche: catch-all email verification that other tools often skip.
Pricing: Starter at $59/mo (10K credits), Professional at $149/mo (50K + API), Scale at $379/mo (150K + API). Credits run 1:1 for verification and 2:1 for enrichment.
Here's what makes it interesting. Enrichley automatically re-runs catch-all results through a proprietary second pass, claiming a 20-30% uplift in usable contacts from catch-all domains. A 2025 verifier test from Clay list building showed 96.5-97.8% data quality and 95.3-98.9% coverage - strong numbers for a specialist tool.
Best for: Teams running waterfall verification stacks who need a dedicated catch-all layer.
Not for: Anyone who needs to find emails from scratch. It simply doesn't do that.
GetProspect at a Glance
GetProspect is a prospecting platform with an 18M-contact database and a Chrome extension. It sits at 4.0/5 on G2 from 41 reviews.
The Chrome extension makes finding emails from professional profiles fast and intuitive, and the $49/mo entry point gets you 1,000 valid emails plus 2,000 verifications. A free tier with 50 valid emails lets you test before committing. GetProspect says you pay only for verified contacts and doesn't charge for duplicates, which keeps costs predictable.
The downsides are real, though. Verified match rates consistently land around 62-65% in benchmark-style tests. The 18M-contact database is small compared to Apollo or Prospeo's 300M+ profiles. And one older G2 review titled "Easy way to get your LinkedIn account shut down and poor customer service" is worth reading if you're relying heavily on the extension.
Enrichley verifies but can't find emails. GetProspect finds them at 62-65% accuracy. Prospeo does both - 300M+ profiles, 143M+ verified emails, and a 5-step verification pipeline with catch-all handling that delivers 98% accuracy at ~$0.01/email.
Stop paying for two tools that underperform one.
Pricing Breakdown
| Feature | Enrichley Starter | Enrichley Professional | GetProspect Starter | GetProspect Growth 5k |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly cost | $59 | $149 | $49 | $99 |
| Verifications | 10,000 | 50,000 | 2,000 | 10,000 |
| Email finding | No | No | 1,000 valid | 5,000 valid |
| API access | No | Yes | No | No |
Enrichley Starter works out to $0.0059 per verification. Enrichley Scale drops to roughly $0.0025. GetProspect Starter runs $0.0245 per verification - about 4x more expensive than Enrichley Starter and roughly 10x more than Enrichley Scale. That gap makes sense because you're also paying for email finding, not just verification.
GetProspect also sells one-time verification packs (10K for $29) that never expire, and annual billing saves 30%.
Let's be honest: if your average deal size is under $5K, GetProspect's finding-plus-verification bundle at $49/mo is probably the smarter buy. You'll waste more money stitching tools together than you'll save on per-email costs.
Accuracy Compared
We've tracked GetProspect's verified match rate across three benchmark-style comparisons, and they converge on the same story:
| Benchmark | Sample | Verified rate |
|---|---|---|
| PhantomBuster | 1,000 | 65% |
| Reddit r/coldemail | 2,500 | 64.6% |
| Anymail Finder | 5,000 | 61.9% |
That means roughly 1 in 3 lookups won't return a verified email. Not terrible for a budget tool, but it'll slow list-building at scale.
Enrichley's numbers come from a different angle - the Clay verifier test shows 96.5-97.8% data quality. These are verification metrics, not finding metrics, so it's not apples-to-apples. For deliverability after emails are found, though, Enrichley's quality scores are strong.
For context, Prospeo's 5-step verification pipeline - including catch-all handling, spam-trap removal, and honeypot filtering - delivers 98% email accuracy across 143M+ verified addresses. That's the benchmark we measure both tools against.
Catch-All Handling
Catch-all domains accept every email sent to them regardless of whether the address exists - the server says "sure, I'll take it," but the email may still bounce later or never reach the intended inbox. Most verifiers label these "unknown" and move on. That's useless for outbound teams.
What you need from a catch-all verifier is actionable verdicts (not just "unknown"), spam-trap detection, disposable and role account flagging, and likely-complainer signals. The quality of catch-all handling separates tools that protect your sender reputation from ones that just check SMTP responses and call it a day.
Enrichley built its entire positioning around this. The proprietary second-pass catch-all verification is its core differentiator, and the available benchmark data supports strong quality scores. GetProspect mentions "proprietary catch-all email verification" on its pricing page, but there's no catch-all-only benchmark to validate it. The overall 62-65% verified rate includes whatever catch-all processing they do - and the consensus on r/coldemail is that GetProspect's catch-all handling isn't a standout feature.
Which One Should You Pick?
Choose Enrichley if you already have email lists and deliverability is your biggest problem. You're running a waterfall verification stack, catch-all domains are eating your results, and you need a specialist layer under $0.006 per verification. Skip it if you need to build lists from scratch - it won't help you there.
Choose GetProspect if you need to find emails, want a Chrome extension for quick prospecting, and can live with a ~63% verified match rate. It's a solid budget option for teams that need finding plus basic workflow features in one tool.
Consider Prospeo if the Enrichley vs GetProspect tradeoff feels like a false choice - because it kind of is. Prospeo pairs a 300M+ profile database with 98% email accuracy, 125M+ verified mobile numbers, and a 7-day data refresh cycle. It handles finding, verification, and enrichment in one platform with 30+ search filters including buyer intent and technographics. The free tier gives you 75 emails and 100 extension credits per month - no contract, no sales call.
Catch-all handling shouldn't be a premium add-on. Prospeo's verification includes spam-trap removal, honeypot filtering, and catch-all resolution - built into every lookup across 143M+ verified emails, refreshed every 7 days.
Find, verify, and send - all from one platform at $0.01 per email.
FAQ
Is Enrichley an email finder or just a verifier?
Enrichley is a verification and enrichment tool, not an email finder. You bring existing addresses and it validates them - including catch-all domains. It doesn't have a prospecting database or Chrome extension for discovering new contacts.
Why is GetProspect's verified rate only ~63%?
Three independent benchmark-style tests converge on the 62-65% range across sample sizes from 1,000 to 5,000 contacts, suggesting a real ceiling rather than a testing fluke. Its 18M-contact database is relatively small, which limits coverage - especially outside North America and Western Europe.
Which tool is cheaper for bulk verification?
Enrichley wins on per-verification cost at every tier. At Starter, it's $0.0059 per verification versus GetProspect's $0.0245. GetProspect's one-time packs (10,000 for $29, or $0.0029 each) close the gap, but Enrichley's Scale plan at roughly $0.0025 per verification is still cheaper for sustained volume.
What's a good alternative if neither tool fits?
For teams that need finding and verification in one platform, Prospeo is the strongest option - 75 free emails per month, 98% email accuracy, and 300M+ profiles with no stitching required. Other alternatives include Apollo (larger free tier, lower accuracy) and Hunter (simple UI, limited enrichment).