Clearbit alternatives, measured
Eight APIs—People Data Labs, Apollo, Parallel, Predict Leads, Explorium, CompanyEnrich, ZoomInfo, and Exa—receive the same company domain and enrich it by API calls from their official docs.
Clearbit's standalone enrichment API is a sunset product after the HubSpot acquisition — new API keys are no longer issued. If you used Clearbit as a self-serve company enrichment API, you need a replacement.
Most “Clearbit alternatives” lists are affiliate content. This one is measured: the same 282 human-reviewed companies, judged field by field against Ground Truth — with cost at public self-serve rates.
Which company enrichment API is best?
There isn't one best enrichment API. The right choice depends on what happens next: filling CRM records, avoiding bad overwrites, matching a prospect list, returning complete company profiles, or powering a latency-sensitive product flow. Choose the job below; each recommendation is based on the metric that matters for it.
Which provider wins depends on the use case — CRM writeback, prospecting and matching, complete company profiles, or real-time product flows. The workflows below are ranked separately for each.
| Workflow | Recommended API | Measured evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Best API for keeping CRM records current | People Data Labs | 89.0% enrichment success rate |
| Best API for safe CRM writeback | Apollo | 92.6% field accuracy |
| Best API for the most complete company data | Parallel | 94.7% field coverage |
| Best API for matching a company list | Predict Leads | 100.0% company match rate |
| Best API for real-time product or agent enrichment | People Data Labs | 274 ms median latency |
Compare every measured company enrichment API.
This is the overall provider table from the current 282-company benchmark: resolution, enrichment success, field accuracy, coverage, latency, cost, and the exact endpoint tested. Read the complete benchmark methodology for cohort design, Ground Truth, field judging, pricing assumptions, and public evidence.
| Provider | Official docs | Resolution | Enrichment success rate | Field accuracy | Field coverage | Median latency | Est. cost | Endpoint & configuration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apollo | Apollo official docs | 96.8%273/282 domains | 88.6% | 92.6% | 93.0% | 654 ms | $10.88$0.0196 / credit | POST /api/v1/mixed_companies/search → GET /api/v1/organizations/{id}page=1; per_page=1 |
| CompanyEnrich | CompanyEnrich official docs | 98.6%278/282 domains | 69.7% | 72.5% | 93.7% | 309 ms | $2.76$0.0098 / credit | GET /companies/enrichdomain={company domain} |
| Exa | Exa official docs | 100.0%282/282 domains | 60.4% | 76.2% | 77.1% | 8,143 ms | $4.23$0.015 / deep-reasoning request | POST /searchtype=deep-reasoning; category=company; numResults=10; highlights + structured output |
| Explorium | Explorium official docs | 95.0%268/282 domains | 70.5% | 87.6% | 76.0% | 616 ms | $22.00$0.04 / credit | POST /v1/businesses/match → POST /v1/businessesmode=full; page=1; page_size=10; size=10 |
| Parallel | Parallel official docs | 99.7%281/282 domains | 86.0% | 89.4% | 94.7% | 21,317 ms | $14.10$0.050 / Responses request (medium reasoning) | POST /v1/responsesmodel=parallel; reasoning.effort=medium; JSON schema output |
| People Data Labs | People Data Labs official docs | 98.2%277/282 domains | 89.0% | 91.2% | 94.3% | 274 ms | $27.70$0.10 / match | GET /v5/company/enrichwebsite={company domain} |
| Predict Leads | Predict Leads official docs | 100.0%282/282 domains | 80.6% | 86.5% | 87.9% | 556 ms | $40.00$0.04 / API credit · 100 free; $40 monthly minimum | GET /api/v3/extended_companies/{domain}1 company domain per request; follows API redirect target when returned |
| ZoomInfo | ZoomInfo official docs | 94.7%267/282 domains | 63.9% | 70.4% | 88.7% | 1,132 ms | $93.45$0.35 / new company record | gtm companies enrich--domain {company domain} --fields name website domainList city state country primaryIndustry industries employeeCount employeeRange foundedYear socialMediaUrls |
Compare provider results field by field.
This is the main benchmark's per-field table for HQ location, industry, employee band, founded year, and LinkedIn URL. Each value is correct-field yield among companies carrying a reviewed reference for that attribute, so denominators differ by column.
| Provider | Official docs | HQ location | Industry | Employee band | Founded year | LinkedIn URL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apollo | Apollo official docs | 87.3%240/275 | 95.4%269/282 | 78.2%219/280 | 91.8%191/208 | 90.8%256/282 |
| CompanyEnrich | CompanyEnrich official docs | 50.9%140/275 | 74.8%211/282 | 47.5%133/280 | 90.4%188/208 | 91.1%257/282 |
| Exa | Exa official docs | 82.9%228/275 | 96.1%271/282 | 33.2%93/280 | 97.6%203/208 | 5.3%15/282 |
| Explorium | Explorium official docs | 73.5%202/275 | 84.8%239/282 | 88.9%249/280 | 0.0%0/208 | 86.5%244/282 |
| Parallel | Parallel official docs | 90.9%250/275 | 92.9%262/282 | 80.7%226/280 | 76.4%159/208 | 86.2%243/282 |
| People Data Labs | People Data Labs official docs | 90.2%248/275 | 94.0%265/282 | 86.4%242/280 | 93.8%195/208 | 84.0%237/282 |
| Predict Leads | Predict Leads official docs | 68.4%188/275 | 88.3%249/282 | 78.2%219/280 | 89.9%187/208 | 84.8%239/282 |
| ZoomInfo | ZoomInfo official docs | 73.1%201/275 | 74.5%210/282 | 47.9%134/280 | 61.4%129/210 | 62.4%176/282 |
Eight Clearbit alternatives on measured data
Compare enrichment success rate, field accuracy, latency, and cost. Cost is estimated at each provider's public entry self-serve rate for the full 282-company cohort:
| Provider | Enrichment success rate | Field accuracy | Median latency | Est. cost (cohort) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| People Data Labs | 89.0% | 91.2% | 274 ms | $27.70 |
| Apollo | 88.6% | 92.6% | 654 ms | $10.88 |
| Parallel | 86.0% | 89.4% | 21,317 ms | $14.10 |
| Predict Leads | 80.6% | 86.5% | 556 ms | $40.00 |
| Explorium | 70.5% | 87.6% | 616 ms | $22.00 |
| CompanyEnrich | 69.7% | 72.5% | 309 ms | $2.76 |
| ZoomInfo | 63.9% | 70.4% | 1,132 ms | $93.45 |
| Exa | 60.4% | 76.2% | 8,143 ms | $4.23 |
Scope note: this measures company-level firmographic enrichment (five scored fields from a domain). If your Clearbit usage was contact/person enrichment or reveal-style visitor identification, those workloads are not measured here — treat vendor accuracy claims on them accordingly. Full methodology and per-company evidence →
Clearbit alternatives — common questions
What happened to Clearbit?
HubSpot acquired Clearbit. The standalone enrichment API developers built against is a sunset product: new API keys are no longer issued. Teams that used Clearbit as a self-serve enrichment API need a replacement.
What is the best Clearbit alternative?
Depends on your constraint, so here are the measured answers on 282 human-reviewed companies: most correct data end to end — People Data Labs (89.0% correct field yield); fewest wrong values among returned fields — Apollo (92.6%); cheapest at public self-serve rates — CompanyEnrich ($2.76 for the cohort); fastest — People Data Labs (274 ms median). All eight alternatives are measured on identical inputs below.
Is there a cheap Clearbit alternative?
At entry self-serve rates, CompanyEnrich was cheapest for this cohort ($2.76 total). Each provider's per-unit rate and pricing page are listed in the benchmark's cost methodology. Weigh cost against measured yield — cheap wrong data is expensive.
How were these alternatives measured?
Every provider received the same 282 human-reviewed company domains (including subsidiaries and recent rebrands — the hard cases). GPT-5.6-terra judged HQ, industry, founded year, and LinkedIn URL; GPT-5.6-sol at medium reasoning judged employee band with the dedicated numeric policy. No vendor pays for inclusion or rank; all inputs, outputs, and judgments are public and reproducible.