Lusha vs Apollo.io: Which One Actually Delivers Accurate Data?
Eighteen percent hard bounces on day one. Another quarter of your list already changed jobs. That's not a worst case - it's a Tuesday for teams trusting "verified" labels without a second check.
If you're weighing Lusha vs Apollo.io, here's how they actually stack up on data, pricing, and credit economics - and what to do when neither delivers.
30-Second Verdict
- Pick Apollo if you need an all-in-one outbound platform with sequences, a dialer, and lead scoring in one place.
- Pick Lusha if you already have an outreach stack and just need fast contact reveals from a Chrome extension.
- Skip both if accuracy is your top priority. Prospeo delivers 98% email accuracy on a 7-day refresh cycle, starting free.
Feature Comparison at a Glance
| Feature | Apollo.io | Lusha |
|---|---|---|
| G2 Rating | 4.7/5 (9,514 reviews) | 4.3/5 (1,619 reviews) |
| Database Size | 275M+ contacts | 100-150M+ contacts |
| Free Plan | Unlimited email credits, 5 mobile/mo, 10 export credits/mo | Up to 70 credits/mo |
| Starting Price | ~$49/user/mo (Basic) | ~$22.45/user/mo (Pro, annual) |
| Best For | All-in-one outbound | Quick contact reveals |
| Biggest Weakness | Data accuracy at scale | Credits burn fast |
Apollo's 9,500+ G2 reviews reflect how deeply embedded it is in outbound workflows. Lusha scores higher on ease of use - 9.2 vs Apollo's 9.0 on G2 - which tracks given its narrower focus. On Capterra, Lusha sits at 4.0/5 across 396 reviews, with most complaints centering on how quickly credits disappear during phone-heavy prospecting.
Data Accuracy: How Reliable Is Each Database?
Here's the thing. An SDR on r/coldemail exported 2,000 "verified" Apollo contacts. Roughly 900 were usable after bounces and job changes. That's not an outlier - "Inaccurate Data" appears as a negative theme across 503 Apollo G2 reviews. We've seen teams lose entire weeks of pipeline to stale Apollo exports, and the pattern is consistent enough that you shouldn't send an Apollo list without a verification pass first.
Lusha's accuracy sits around 81%, above the 60-70% industry average but still meaning one in five contacts won't connect. Both tools are strongest in the US and Western Europe; coverage drops noticeably in APAC and the Middle East. Neither tool publicly standardizes a single refresh cadence that teams can rely on across the whole database, which makes it hard to predict when your data will go stale.
Neither Lusha's 81% accuracy nor Apollo's community-reported bounce rates protect your domain. Prospeo's 5-step verification and 7-day refresh cycle deliver 98% email accuracy - the difference between a healthy sender reputation and weeks of recovery.
Stop verifying bad data. Start with data that's already clean.
Credit Economics
Lusha's pricing looks affordable until you start dialing. Phone reveals cost 10 credits each. A team of three SDRs revealing 50 phone numbers per day burns 1,500 credits - a month's allotment gone in days.
Apollo's math is different. Email reveals cost 1 credit, phone reveals cost 5, and credits expire each billing cycle with no rollover.
| Cost Per Contact | Apollo (Pro, ~$79/mo) | Lusha (Pro, ~$22/mo) |
|---|---|---|
| Per email reveal | ~$0.02 | ~$0.09 |
| Per phone reveal | ~$0.10 | ~$0.88 |
| Credits roll over? | No | Yes (monthly plans, up to 2x) |
Lusha's rollover policy is genuinely useful if your outbound volume fluctuates month to month. Apollo's expiring credits punish inconsistency - and its recent credit system migration means two teams on the same plan can have different limits depending on signup date. Let's just say the billing page isn't winning any clarity awards.
When to Pick Each Tool
Pick Apollo if you're building outbound from scratch. The 275M+ contact database plus built-in sequences, dialer, and buying intent mean fewer integrations to manage. The tradeoff is a steeper learning curve, and the UI changes frequently enough to disrupt muscle memory. The consensus on r/salesdevelopment is that Apollo is powerful but frustrating - you'll spend real time learning its quirks before it pays off.
If you're still assembling your stack, it helps to benchmark against other SDR tools and outbound lead generation tools before you commit.
Pick Lusha if you already run Outreach or Salesloft and just need a fast way to pull contact data. In our experience, Lusha's Chrome extension is the fastest reveal experience on the market - two clicks without leaving your browser. Skip Lusha if your team does heavy phone prospecting; the credit burn will frustrate you within the first week.
Hot take: If your deal sizes sit below five figures, you probably don't need either tool's full platform. A dedicated email finder paired with a lightweight sequencer will outperform an all-in-one you only use 30% of.
What Both Tools Miss
Apollo's platform depth and Lusha's speed are genuine strengths. But neither solves the accuracy gap. You can have 275M contacts - if 15-20% bounce on first send, your domain reputation takes the hit, and recovering sender reputation is a slow, painful process that costs far more than the data itself.
If you're seeing deliverability issues, start with the basics: email bounce rate, email deliverability, and how to improve sender reputation.
Prospeo's 300M+ profile database runs on a 7-day refresh cycle with 5-step verification, catch-all handling, and spam-trap removal. That 98% email accuracy moved Meritt's bounce rate from 35% to under 4% - and their pipeline tripled from $100K to $300K per week. Pricing is self-serve at ~$0.01 per email with a free tier of 75 verified emails per month plus 100 Chrome extension credits. No contracts, no sales calls. If you're running Apollo or Lusha but bleeding deliverability, layer in a verification step or replace the data source entirely.
Lusha burns credits on phone reveals. Apollo's credits expire monthly. Prospeo costs ~$0.01 per verified email with no contracts and no expiration games - plus 125M+ verified mobiles at a 30% pickup rate when you need direct dials.
Better data, fraction of the cost. See the difference in your first export.
FAQ
Is Apollo.io better than Lusha for cold email?
Apollo is the stronger choice for cold email specifically - it has built-in sequences, a dialer, and lead scoring that Lusha lacks. But its data accuracy (91% claimed, lower in practice based on community reports) means you should verify contacts through a dedicated tool before hitting send.
Why do Lusha credits run out so fast?
Phone reveals cost 10 credits each. Fifty phone reveals per day across a small team exhausts a Pro plan's monthly allotment in days. Email-only reveals at 1 credit each are far more sustainable - budget for Premium or Scale if your motion is phone-first.
Is there a more accurate alternative to both?
Prospeo delivers 98% email accuracy with a 7-day data refresh across 300M+ profiles. The free tier gives you 75 emails per month - enough to run a real comparison against whatever you're using now. Teams switching from Apollo report 35% more meetings booked after the swap.