Email Finder Leaderboard
Ranked on price, EU & US coverage, accuracy and speed. Marketplace providers tested live on 400 real contacts.
Click a column to re-rank
| # | Provider | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.0 | $0.020 | 88% | 83% | 86% | 1.8s | TEST LIVE | |
| 2 | 0.0 | $0.017 | 64% | 68% | 98% | 20s | ||
| 3 | 0.0 | $0.020 | 71% | 69% | 92% | 3s | TEST LIVE | |
| 4 | 0.0 | $0.016 | 65% | 80% | 89% | 3s | ||
| 5 | 0.0 | $0.06 | 68% | 68% | 91% | 2s | TEST LIVE | |
| 6 | 0.0 | $0.020 | 62% | 58% | 95% | 7.4s | TEST LIVE | |
| 7 | 0.0 | $0.07 | 67% | 67% | 89% | 3s | ||
| 8 | 0.0 | $0.025 | 59% | 55% | 89% | 1.9s | TEST LIVE | |
| 9 | 0.0 | $0.08 | 83% | 89% | 84% | 10s | ||
| 10 | 0.0 | $0.13 | 72% | 72% | 87% | 2s | ||
| 11 | 0.0 | $0.06 | 85% | 90% | 89% | 3min | TEST LIVE | |
| 12 | 0.0 | $0.016 | 48% | 46% | 91% | 3.2s | TEST LIVE | |
| 13 | 0.0 | $0.08 | 60% | 64% | 95% | 1min | ||
| 14 | 0.0 | $0.019 | 79% | 76% | 81% | 5.1s | TEST LIVE | |
| 15 | 0.0 | $0.025 | 51% | 64% | 86% | 2s | ||
| 16 | 0.0 | $0.18 | 72% | 67% | 93% | 1min | ||
| 17 | 0.0 | $0.20 | 60% | 60% | 88% | 20s | TEST LIVE | |
| 18 | 0.0 | $0.14 | 72% | 74% | 73% | 4.7s | TEST LIVE | |
| 19 | 0.0 | $0.020 | 49% | 49% | 74% | 3s | ||
| 20 | 0.0 | $0.039 | 46% | 46% | 75% | 5s | ||
| 21 | 0.0 | $0.049 | 38% | 44% | 75% | 10s | ||
| 22 | 0.0 | $0.39 | 30% | 30% | 83% | 5s |
Live-test results and published figures - see methodology below · Updated 2026-10-12 · Compare two providers head-to-head →
Metric leaders
The general ranking hides trade-offs. Here is who wins each dimension on its own.
Accuracy
Leader · EnrowConfirmed or valid share of returned emails - method varies by source.
Enrow98%
BetterContact95%
LeadMagic95%
Dropcontact93%
Findymail92%
AI Ark91%
Coverage · EU vs US
Leader · FullEnrichHow often a work email is found - orange EU, black US.
FullEnrich85%90%
Anymail Finder83%89%
Lima Data88%83%
Icypeas79%76%
LinkUp72%74%
Datagma65%80%
Price Per Email
Leader · AI ArkUSD per successfully found email - misses excluded.
AI Ark$0.016
Datagma$0.016
Enrow$0.017
Icypeas$0.019
Skrapp$0.020
Findymail$0.020
Speed
Leader · Lima DataMedian seconds for a single lookup.
Lima Data1.8s
Prospeo1.9s
Apollo2s
Lusha2s
Hunter2s
Findymail3s
How the score is built
Each metric is normalized across the field to a score from 0 to 100. Price and speed are inverted since lower is better, and speed uses a log scale so async waterfalls and instant APIs stay comparable. The weighted sum of the five metrics gives the ColdIQ Score. Accuracy carries the most weight: a cheap email that bounces still costs you sender reputation.
Marketplace providers are tested live. ColdIQ live test, October 2026: 400 real B2B contacts (200 EU / 200 US across 6 verticals and every seniority), every provider called through its dedicated email endpoint on the ColdIQ marketplace, two passes 72 hours apart with the median kept. We measure per-region find rate, median lookup latency, and agreement between providers as an accuracy signal, and run every returned email through two independent verifiers. Providers we can't call ourselves are compiled from published benchmarks (independent find-rate and bounce-rate tests, with the sample size on each source) and official pricing pages, with sources on every row of the dataset.
Measures differ by origin. Accuracy for live-tested rows is the share of a provider's emails that another independent provider also returned. Published rows use the valid or non-bouncing share reported by the cited source, so the two are close but not identical signals. Prices are each provider's own self-serve list price per found email, except LinkUp, which publishes no per-email price: its row uses the ColdIQ marketplace rate.
Scores carry real uncertainty. For live-tested rows the coverage margin is the actual Wilson 95% interval of the run (its exact hit counts show on hover); for compiled rows it comes from published benchmarks. Propagated through the weighted aggregate, that puts a margin of roughly 14 to 18 points around every score. Treat providers within a few points of each other as statistical ties: the order is our best estimate, not a proven gap.
Figures remain estimates: coverage swings with your ICP, geography and list quality, and email data shifts weekly. Every pricing figure is re-checked against the provider's official page - each row's sources carry their verification date (latest 2026-10-12) - and rows are rescored as new tests land.
The fastest way to know what works on your market: run the same lookup against several providers side by side.
Work at one of these providers? If a figure looks wrong, dispute it - point us at the source (or provision a test API key) and we re-run the protocol and publish whatever it says, within 7 days.
Benchmark them on your own leadsScore Weights
A wrong email costs a bounce
Find rate on European contacts
Find rate on US contacts
Per found email, cheaper scores higher
Median lookup time, faster scores higher
The only ranking that counts is on your leads.
Run the same lookup against these providers on your own list, live, side by side, one API key.
