Apollo vs People Data Labs
Company funding data, measured head-to-head on the same 300 companies: Apollo currently leads on both measured accuracy axes. Every stage judged against source-verified funding events; latency and cost measured beside accuracy. Not vendor claims.
Apollo or People Data Labs — measured winner per axis
| Axis | Apollo | People Data Labs | Measured winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Correct latest stage end to end (correct stage yield) | 56.0% | 49.3% | Apollo |
| Right when a stage is returned (accuracy when present) | 70.8% | 65.3% | Apollo |
| Funding fields returned (field coverage) | 65.4% | 61.9% | Apollo |
| Companies resolved (resolution rate) | 97.0% | 96.0% | Apollo |
| Speed (median latency) | 286 ms | 275 ms | People Data Labs |
| Cost (cohort, self-serve rates) (estimated cost) | $5.70 | $29 | Apollo |
Contact data, intent, and integrations are not measured here — this is the company-funding slice only. Full leaderboard, methodology, and per-company evidence →
Apollo vs People Data Labs — common questions
Apollo vs People Data Labs: which has better funding data?
On measured correct stage yield (right latest funding stage across all companies with a verified reference), Apollo leads: Apollo 56.0% vs People Data Labs 49.3%, judged against source-verified funding events on the same 300 companies. On accuracy when a stage is returned, Apollo leads (70.8% vs 65.3%).
Is Apollo or People Data Labs cheaper for funding data?
At public self-serve rates for the same 300-company run: Apollo $5.70 vs People Data Labs $29 — Apollo is cheaper. Weigh cost against correct stage yield: a stale stage misroutes accounts, which costs more than the API call.
Which is faster, Apollo or People Data Labs?
Median request latency on the same run: Apollo 286 ms vs People Data Labs 275 ms — People Data Labs is faster. Latency matters when funding enrichment runs inline in an agent or product flow; for batch scoring it usually doesn't.
Where does this comparison data come from?
The independent company-funding benchmark on this site: both providers received the same 300 company domains, responses were normalized to one canonical funding-stage contract, and each returned stage was compared to a source-verified reference (company newsroom, wire announcement, or filing). No vendor pays for inclusion or rank; inputs, outputs, and evaluation code are public.