slug: reachfast-vs-salesql
ReachFast vs SalesQL: Phones, Emails, and the Fine Print (2026)
You ran 100 profiles through SalesQL last week and got seven phone numbers. Seven. Your SDRs need direct dials, not office switchboards, and you're stuck wondering whether ReachFast or SalesQL is even the right comparison - or if both tools are the wrong answer.
Here's the breakdown on the metrics that actually matter.
30-Second Verdict
ReachFast wins for phone numbers. Its credit model charges when it finds a direct phone number (mobile or work direct), and it's consistently positioned as the stronger option for dials.
SalesQL wins for high email volume on a tight budget. The free tier and $39/mo Basic plan deliver solid email retrieval without commitment.
Feature Comparison at a Glance
| ReachFast | SalesQL | |
|---|---|---|
| Database | 385M+ professionals | 89M personal + 127M work emails + 30M phones |
| Email accuracy | 97%+ (vendor claim) | ~90% per user reports |
| Verification | Real-time at export, triple-verification noted in reviews | Real-time verified emails and phone numbers |
| G2 rating | 4.5/5 (12 reviews) | 4.5/5 (166 reviews) |
| Trustpilot | 4.5/5 (15 reviews) | 3.8/5 (9 reviews) |
| Free tier | 5 free verified contacts, no card | 100 credits/mo |
| Credit model | Credits burn when a direct phone is found; emails included | 1 credit = all available data for 1 profile |
| Compliance | GDPR, CCPA, DSGVO | GDPR, CCPA |
Identical G2 scores, but SalesQL has about 14x more reviews. ReachFast's sentiment is strong - the sample is just thin.
Phone Numbers: The Real Gap
A WizardSourcer test put SalesQL's mobile retrieval at 10-20% of profiles, while office numbers showed up far more often (50-60%). A UK recruiter on r/Recruitment was blunter: "crap for mobiles."
ReachFast positions itself as mobile-first - direct mobile and work direct numbers only, no office numbers. One Trustpilot reviewer called it "superior to ContactOut, SalesQL particularly in finding phone numbers." That tracks with what we've seen in bake-offs: tools that specialize in phones beat generalist finders by a wide margin on direct dials. If phone numbers are your primary use case, SalesQL usually isn't the tool teams end up standardizing on (see sales prospecting techniques that prioritize direct dials).
Here's the thing, though. Even ReachFast's phone coverage has limits. G2 reviewers flag incomplete or outdated records as a recurring issue, which means you're still going to hit gaps in niche verticals or smaller markets. The question isn't whether either tool is perfect - it's which one wastes fewer credits getting you to a live conversation (and how you measure pipeline health when connect rates drop).
Email Accuracy
Email is SalesQL's stronger suit. WizardSourcer reported 70-80% email retrieval rates, though accuracy in a dev-focused Minneapolis test dropped to 60-65%.
ReachFast claims 97%+ accuracy with real-time verification at export. That's ambitious. Software Advice reviews mention duplicates and incorrect info, and G2 reviewers echo the incomplete-data theme. Real-time verification helps, but it can't fix what's not in the database to begin with. In our experience, email accuracy claims from any vendor rarely survive contact with a niche ICP - test both on your actual target list before committing (use a proper email deliverability guide and track email bounce rate by segment).
Tired of testing email accuracy claims that collapse against your actual ICP? Prospeo's 98% verified email accuracy holds up because every record runs through 5-step verification on a 7-day refresh cycle - not the 6-week industry standard. At $0.01/email, one bad batch from SalesQL or ReachFast costs more than switching.
Test 75 emails free and compare the bounce rate yourself.
Pricing and Credit Math
| ReachFast | SalesQL | |
|---|---|---|
| Entry | $59/mo (900 credits + 225 bonus) | Free (100 credits) |
| Mid-tier | $174/mo (3,600 credits + 900 bonus) | $79/mo (5,000 credits) |
| Top tier | $390/mo (5,000 credits + 1,750 bonus) | $119/mo (12,000 credits) |
The credit models are where people get confused.
SalesQL burns one credit per profile - you get all available data for that credit. ReachFast burns credits when it finds a direct phone number; emails are included with lookups.
Let's do the math: if you need 500 phone numbers per month and SalesQL returns mobiles on 15% of lookups, you'd burn roughly 3,333 credits to hit that target - the $79/mo plan. ReachFast lands around $0.035-$0.052 per credit depending on tier and whether you count bonus credits, which can make it meaningfully cheaper per actual phone number delivered (especially if you're building a repeatable lead generation workflow).
The credit-per-profile model - SalesQL's approach - punishes you for bad data. You pay the same whether you get a verified mobile or a dead office line. ReachFast's model is fairer for phone-heavy workflows, full stop.
What Real Users Complain About
ReachFast - skip this if you need consistently complete records. The top downside across review sites is incomplete and outdated data, with duplicates and partial information showing up repeatedly. The review base is also small: 12 reviews on G2 and 18 on Software Advice, so you're betting on limited signal (if you're comparing vendors, a simple data-driven selling scorecard helps).
SalesQL - skip this if you need phones. The 10-20% mobile retrieval rate isn't competitive. Beyond that, users flag billing frustrations - one Trustpilot reviewer said they couldn't export after their subscription ended, and an older WizardSourcer comment describes an $890 auto-renewal situation with no refund. Poor customer support is a consistent theme (if you're phone-first, build around a real cold calling system).
If Neither Wins Your Bake-Off
ReachFast charges per phone found. SalesQL charges per profile whether you get a mobile or a dead office line. Prospeo gives you 125M+ verified mobile numbers with a 30% pickup rate - plus 98% accurate emails in the same platform. No pairing tools. No wasted credits on bad data.
Stop splitting your stack between two incomplete tools.
The Bottom Line
When comparing ReachFast vs SalesQL, the answer depends on your workflow. Phone-heavy outbound? ReachFast. Its credit model rewards that use case. Budget email volume? SalesQL. The free tier makes it easy to test.
Neither is a complete prospecting solution. You'll pair them with a verification tool anyway - or start with one that verifies at the source (and if you're evaluating options, start with a shortlist of data enrichment services and best sales prospecting databases).
FAQ
Is ReachFast better than SalesQL for phone numbers?
Yes. ReachFast's mobile-first model consistently outperforms SalesQL's 10-20% mobile retrieval rate. The gap is especially obvious in markets like the UK, where users call out weak mobile coverage for SalesQL. If direct dials are your priority, ReachFast is the stronger pick.
Does SalesQL have a free plan?
Yes - 100 credits/month on one seat. One credit returns all available contact data for one profile, so you can test both email and phone coverage before committing.
How do ReachFast credits work?
Credits burn when a direct phone number is found (mobile or work direct). Email addresses are included with lookups, which makes ReachFast cheaper per phone number than tools that charge one credit for all data regardless of what's returned.
What's a good alternative with better accuracy than both?
Prospeo delivers 98% email accuracy and 125M+ verified mobiles on a 7-day refresh cycle - higher than either ReachFast's or SalesQL's reported accuracy. The free tier (75 emails/month) lets you verify the difference yourself before paying.