Head-to-head
Clay vs Hunter.io
Clay is our stronger pick on aggregate; Hunter.io still wins for specific personas.
8.7
/ 10
Pricing
7.8
/ 10
8.7
/ 10
Deliverability
7.8
/ 10
8.7
/ 10
Integrations
7.8
/ 10
8.7
/ 10
Use-case fit
7.8
/ 10
Pick Clay when
- →Growth teams with at least one ops-shaped person who'll build the workflows. Clay is a power tool — wasted on a buyer who wants a button-press lead list.
- →Teams that want to compose enrichment from multiple sources (Apollo + LinkedIn + ZoomInfo + custom scrapers + AI prompts) rather than pick one provider and live with its gaps.
- →Operators who care about per-prospect personalization at scale and need the raw data + AI prompt orchestration to support it.
- →Anyone whose ICP isn't well-covered by the major databases — Clay's waterfall logic gracefully degrades through 5+ providers.
Pick Hunter.io when
- →Solo founders or small teams that need occasional email lookups rather than systematic prospecting (under 200 lookups/month).
- →Recruiters or freelancers who want a fast, focused email-finder Chrome extension without a full database subscription.
- →Buyers who appreciate Hunter's free tier (25 searches/month) for very low-volume use.
- →Operators who run domain-based lookups (find all emails at a company) more than role-based prospecting.
- →Entry pricing matters — $49 vs $149
Clay
from $149/mo
Hunter.io
from $49/mo
Side-by-side data
Sort by:
Comparison updates
We re-run the head-to-heads quarterly. Subscribe and we'll send the new verdicts when the data shifts.