Head-to-head
Clay vs Lusha
Clay is our stronger pick on aggregate; Lusha still wins for specific personas.
8.7
/ 10
Pricing
7.7
/ 10
8.7
/ 10
Deliverability
7.7
/ 10
8.7
/ 10
Integrations
7.7
/ 10
8.7
/ 10
Use-case fit
7.7
/ 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 Lusha when
- →SDR teams whose outbound mix includes cold calling — mobile-number accuracy is where Lusha differentiates.
- →Recruiters or talent-acquisition teams who need contact phone numbers more than email.
- →Buyers who want a Chrome extension that surfaces contact info on LinkedIn without a full database subscription.
- →Operators targeting verticals (manufacturing, healthcare, finance) where phone is still the dominant outreach channel.
- →Entry pricing matters — $36 vs $149
Clay
from $149/mo
Lusha
from $36/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.