Best company funding data providers
The company funding data landscape splits into two groups: nineteen programmatic endpoints measured through APIs or structured web research, plus Crunchbase and Harmonic exports measured on the same cohort. PitchBook and Tracxn are private-market investor-research products, including PE workflows, rather than self-serve GTM sales enrichment APIs. This page covers what each vendor exposes and how it is reached, and why the excluded incumbents are not ranked. Scores live on the benchmark itself.
Vendor material tends to cover coverage and skip lag. Both boards are below: one on rounds that had already settled when the vendor ran, one on rounds announced inside the last month. Vendors that look interchangeable on the first can separate by a wide margin on the second, which is usually the more useful thing to know when choosing between them.
The 16 measured providers are Apollo, CompanyEnrich, Crunchbase, Crustdata, Exa, Explorium, Fiber, Firecrawl, Fundable, Harmonic, Ocean.io, Parallel, People Data Labs, PredictLeads, Seltz, and ZoomInfo. Several are measured on more than one endpoint, for 21 arms in total.
Which vendors keep up with new rounds.
The rolling board, rebuilt each month from rounds announced inside the window. A vendor selling a large historical database can still be weeks behind on the round that closed last Tuesday. This is the rolling freshness board, pooled across every dated snapshot, so each row carries the number of companies that provider was measured on. The company funding benchmark has other vendors that were benchmarked on the same input data. The methodology covers cohort design, Ground Truth and the judging rules.
| Provider | Endpoint & configuration | Measured on | Latest stage correct | Correct when returned | Latest stage returned | Funding fields returned | Fields returned | Median latency | Est. cost | Official docs | Company identified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long Running Agent APIs | |||||||||||
| Exa | POST /agent/runseffort=medium · JSON schema | 100company measurements · 2 snapshots | 97.0% | 97.9% | 96.0% | 73.6% | 3.7 / 5 | 27,293 ms | $10.00$0.10 / request (medium effort) | Exa official docs | 100.0%100/100 domains |
| Firecrawl | POST /v2/agentmodel=spark-2 · JSON schema · maxCredits capped per run | 50company measurements · 1 snapshot | 100.0% | 100.0% | 98.0% | 87.2% | 4.4 / 5 | 102,203 ms | $1.98$0.59 / 1,000 credits | Firecrawl official docs | 100.0%50/50 domains |
| Firecrawl | POST /v2/agentmodel=spark-1-mini · JSON schema · maxCredits capped per run | 100company measurements · 2 snapshots | 96.0% | 96.9% | 97.0% | 94.4% | 4.7 / 5 | 92,998 ms | $9.95$0.59 / 1,000 credits | Firecrawl official docs | 100.0%100/100 domains |
| Parallel | POST /v1/tasks/runsprocessor=core · structured JSON output | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 95.0% | 96.0% | 95.6% | 86.7% | 4.3 / 5 | 62,142 ms | $4.53$25 / 1,000 Task runs | Parallel official docs | 100.0%181/181 domains |
| Web search APIs | |||||||||||
| Exa | POST /searchtype=instant · JSON schema | 100company measurements · 2 snapshots | 98.0% | 99.0% | 95.0% | 90.2% | 4.5 / 5 | 1,618 ms | $0.70$0.007 / request | Exa official docs | 100.0%100/100 domains |
| Exa | POST /searchtype=deep-reasoning · JSON schema | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 95.6% | 96.0% | 96.7% | 84.8% | 4.2 / 5 | 9,916 ms | $2.71$0.015 / request | Exa official docs | 100.0%181/181 domains |
| Parallel | POST /v1/responsesmodel=parallel · reasoning.effort=medium · text.format JSON schema | 100company measurements · 2 snapshots | 90.0% | 90.6% | 96.0% | 82.6% | 4.1 / 5 | 17,020 ms | $5.00$50 / 1,000 Responses requests (medium reasoning) | Parallel official docs | 100.0%100/100 domains |
| Seltz | POST /v1/answerscope=news · response_format JSON | 100company measurements · 2 snapshots | 71.0% | 85.9% | 78.0% | 57.8% | 2.9 / 5 | 2,109 ms | --Pricing not disclosed | Seltz official docs | 100.0%100/100 domains |
| Seltz | POST /v1/answerscope=companies · response_format JSON | 100company measurements · 2 snapshots | 22.0% | 32.8% | 67.0% | 62.6% | 3.1 / 5 | 2,118 ms | --Pricing not disclosed | Seltz official docs | 100.0%100/100 domains |
| GTM data providers | |||||||||||
| Apollo | GET /api/v1/organizations/enrich | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 59.7% | 69.5% | 85.1% | 70.1% | 3.5 / 5 | 320 ms | $3.44$0.0196 / modeled credit | Apollo official docs | 97.2%176/181 domains |
| CompanyEnrich | GET /companies/enrich | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 12.7% | 19.1% | 63.5% | 56.8% | 2.8 / 5 | 334 ms | $1.77$0.0098 / credit | CompanyEnrich official docs | 96.7%175/181 domains |
| Crunchbase (exported dataset) | Crunchbase self-serve plan exportidentity-mapped export · not an API run | 81company measurements · 1 snapshot | 95.1% | 98.7% | 96.3% | 92.6% | 4.6 / 5 | -- | --Not comparable | Crunchbase (exported dataset) official docs | 100.0%81/81 domains |
| Crustdata | POST /company/enrichexact_match=true · fields=[funding] · 25 domains/batch | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 81.2% | 90.1% | 89.5% | 71.3% | 3.6 / 5 | 1,537 ms | $54.30$0.30 / response credit | Crustdata official docs | 96.1%174/181 domains |
| Explorium | POST /v1/businesses/match + bulk_enrichfunding_and_acquisition enrichment | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 5.5% | 13.6% | 36.5% | 40.4% | 2.0 / 5 | 715 ms | $11.00$0.04 / request proxy | Explorium official docs | 44.8%81/181 domains |
| Fiber | POST /v1/company-search | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 74.6% | 80.2% | 92.3% | 88.3% | 4.4 / 5 | 615 ms | $4.11$0.020 / credit | Fiber official docs | 97.8%177/181 domains |
| Fundable | GET /api/v1/companydomain query parameter | 100company measurements · 2 snapshots | 84.0% | 92.3% | 91.0% | 91.0% | 4.5 / 5 | 1,300 ms | $3.53$0.05 / credit | Fundable official docs | 91.0%91/100 domains |
| Harmonic (exported dataset) | Supplied Harmonic company exportidentity-audited mapping · not an API run | 81company measurements · 1 snapshot | 81.5% | 81.5% | 100.0% | 91.8% | 4.6 / 5 | -- | --Pricing not disclosed | Harmonic (exported dataset) official docs | 100.0%81/81 domains |
| Ocean.io | POST /v2/enrich/company | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 11.1% | 19.4% | 54.1% | 29.4% | 1.5 / 5 | 575 ms | $1.11$0.064 / credit | Ocean.io official docs | 96.7%175/181 domains |
| People Data Labs | GET /v5/company/enrich | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 13.3% | 19.5% | 65.2% | 51.4% | 2.6 / 5 | 325 ms | $17.38$0.10 / successful match | People Data Labs official docs | 92.3%167/181 domains |
| PredictLeads | GET /api/v3/companies/{domain}/financing_events | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 68.0% | 82.4% | 81.8% | 64.3% | 3.2 / 5 | 561 ms | $4.83$0.04 / request · 100 free | PredictLeads official docs | 84.0%152/181 domains |
| ZoomInfo | gtm companies enrich --file10 domains/batch · 4 funding fields | 181company measurements · 3 snapshots | 72.4% | 85.0% | 84.5% | 85.8% | 4.3 / 5 | 958 ms | $18.10$0.10 / credit launch promo · $0.35 standard | ZoomInfo official docs | 90.6%164/181 domains |
What each vendor returned, and how you reach it.
Rounds already settled when each vendor ran, which is the closest thing here to a coverage test. Vendors measured on more than one endpoint take a row each, because two endpoints from one vendor can differ sharply in price and speed. This is the funding enrichment board, scored on rounds that were already more than 30 days old when each provider ran. The company funding benchmark also carries the rolling freshness board. The methodology covers cohort design, Ground Truth and the judging rules.
| Provider | Endpoint & configuration | Latest stage correct | Correct when returned | Latest stage returned | Funding fields returned | Fields returned | Median latency | Est. cost | Official docs | Company identified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long Running Agent APIs | ||||||||||
| Exa | POST /agent/runseffort=medium · JSON schema | 88.7% | 93.0% | 90.7% | 67.3% | 3.4 / 5 | 26,549 ms | $30.00$0.10 / request (medium effort) | Exa official docs | 100.0%300/300 domains |
| Firecrawl | POST /v2/agentmodel=spark-1-mini · JSON schema · maxCredits capped per run | 92.3% | 92.3% | 100.0% | 93.3% | 4.7 / 5 | 109,835 ms | $29.86$0.59 / 1,000 credits | Firecrawl official docs | 100.0%300/300 domains |
| Firecrawl | POST /v2/agentmodel=spark-2 · JSON schema · maxCredits capped per run | 87.3% | 89.9% | 95.3% | 84.2% | 4.2 / 5 | 104,406 ms | $11.87$0.59 / 1,000 credits | Firecrawl official docs | 99.7%299/300 domains |
| Parallel | POST /v1/tasks/runsprocessor=core · structured JSON output | 90.0% | 92.3% | 95.4% | 84.9% | 4.3 / 5 | 53,684 ms | $5.47$25 / 1,000 Task runs | Parallel official docs | 100.0%219/219 domains |
| Web search APIs | ||||||||||
| Exa | POST /searchtype=deep-reasoning · JSON schema | 88.6% | 88.6% | 100.0% | 93.6% | 4.7 / 5 | 12,848 ms | $3.29$0.015 / request | Exa official docs | 100.0%219/219 domains |
| Exa | POST /searchtype=instant · JSON schema | 87.0% | 89.0% | 97.0% | 89.0% | 4.5 / 5 | 1,507 ms | $2.10$0.007 / request | Exa official docs | 100.0%300/300 domains |
| Parallel | POST /v1/responsesmodel=parallel · reasoning.effort=medium · text.format JSON schema | 89.0% | 90.1% | 94.3% | 81.6% | 4.1 / 5 | 15,930 ms | $15.00$50 / 1,000 Responses requests (medium reasoning) | Parallel official docs | 100.0%300/300 domains |
| Seltz | POST /v1/answerscope=companies · response_format JSON | 54.7% | 59.9% | 91.3% | 80.7% | 4.0 / 5 | 1,969 ms | --Pricing not disclosed | Seltz official docs | 100.0%300/300 domains |
| Seltz | POST /v1/answerscope=news · response_format JSON | 40.0% | 59.3% | 66.3% | 46.3% | 2.3 / 5 | 1,926 ms | --Pricing not disclosed | Seltz official docs | 100.0%300/300 domains |
| GTM data providers | ||||||||||
| Apollo | GET /api/v1/organizations/enrich | 49.8% | 63.7% | 78.1% | 64.3% | 3.2 / 5 | 284 ms | $4.16$0.0196 / modeled credit | Apollo official docs | 96.8%212/219 domains |
| CompanyEnrich | GET /companies/enrich | 46.1% | 55.2% | 83.6% | 69.3% | 3.5 / 5 | 342 ms | $2.15$0.0098 / credit | CompanyEnrich official docs | 97.7%214/219 domains |
| Crunchbase (exported dataset) | Crunchbase self-serve plan exportidentity-mapped export · not an API run | 85.8% | 90.8% | 94.5% | 87.8% | 4.4 / 5 | -- | --Not comparable | Crunchbase (exported dataset) official docs | 98.6%216/219 domains |
| Crustdata | POST /company/enrichexact_match=true · fields=[funding] · 25 domains/batch | 79.0% | 89.2% | 88.6% | 68.4% | 3.4 / 5 | 1,469 ms | $65.70$0.30 / response credit | Crustdata official docs | 94.1%206/219 domains |
| Explorium | POST /v1/businesses/match + bulk_enrichfunding_and_acquisition enrichment | 21.9% | 43.8% | 40.6% | 46.4% | 2.3 / 5 | 697 ms | $13.32$0.04 / request proxy | Explorium official docs | 53.4%117/219 domains |
| Fiber | POST /v1/company-search | 84.9% | 88.2% | 96.3% | 90.0% | 4.5 / 5 | 632 ms | $4.98$0.020 / credit | Fiber official docs | 97.3%213/219 domains |
| Fundable | GET /api/v1/companydomain query parameter | 60.3% | 86.1% | 69.7% | 68.7% | 3.4 / 5 | 1,370 ms | $10.60$0.05 / credit | Fundable official docs | 70.7%212/300 domains |
| Harmonic (exported dataset) | Supplied Harmonic company exportidentity-audited mapping · not an API run | 71.2% | 72.9% | 97.7% | 90.0% | 4.5 / 5 | -- | --Pricing not disclosed | Harmonic (exported dataset) official docs | 98.6%216/219 domains |
| Ocean.io | POST /v2/enrich/company | 5.5% | 14.3% | 35.2% | 21.1% | 1.1 / 5 | 551 ms | $1.35$0.064 / credit | Ocean.io official docs | 96.3%211/219 domains |
| People Data Labs | GET /v5/company/enrich | 67.6% | 80.9% | 83.6% | 64.7% | 3.2 / 5 | 276 ms | $21.02$0.10 / successful match | People Data Labs official docs | 95.9%210/219 domains |
| PredictLeads | GET /api/v3/companies/{domain}/financing_events | 37.9% | 70.1% | 53.4% | 39.0% | 1.9 / 5 | 562 ms | $5.84$0.04 / request · 100 free | PredictLeads official docs | 57.5%126/219 domains |
| ZoomInfo | gtm companies enrich --file10 domains/batch · 4 funding fields | 46.1% | 78.9% | 58.5% | 62.1% | 3.1 / 5 | 972 ms | $21.90$0.10 / credit launch promo · $0.35 standard | ZoomInfo official docs | 76.7%168/219 domains |
Harmonic, PitchBook, Tracxn & the gated incumbents
Crunchbase's and Harmonic's reviewed exports are scored above. The remaining incumbents do not expose a comparable input set, so their accuracy can't be scored here. They are named without a score.
| Name | Why it's not in the head-to-head |
|---|---|
| PitchBook | Private-market investor research (including PE diligence, funds, LPs, and deal analysis) sold as enterprise seats and data feeds; there is no self-serve GTM sales API to submit a domain and get structured funding back. |
| Tracxn / Dealroom / CB Insights | Private-market research and investor workflows, including PE diligence, rather than self-serve GTM sales enrichment; funding data arrives under contract rather than through a single API that can be scored per domain. |
Common questions about the funding data vendors
What separates a funding data provider from a funding API?
The provider is the company selling the data. The API is the endpoint you call with a company domain to get it back. Some vendors here sell both, some sell a searchable product where funding is one view, and two supply the data as a reviewed export with no endpoint at all. The table above shows which is which.
Why do some vendors appear once here but several times on the benchmark?
This page lists one endpoint per vendor, because it is about the vendor landscape. The benchmark scores endpoints, and four vendors expose more than one, so they take a row each there. An endpoint is the honest unit for a score because two endpoints from the same vendor can differ sharply in price and speed.
Can a vendor supplying an export be compared with one supplying an API?
On correctness, yes. Both answer the same question about the same companies under the same judging policy. On latency and cost, no, and those columns are left blank rather than estimated. An export also has no query moment relative to an announcement, so it cannot be scored on how quickly a round was picked up.
Which vendors are deliberately left out?
Products built for investor research rather than per-domain enrichment, covered in the access context below. The test is whether a GTM system can ask about one company and get a structured answer back. A platform you browse rather than call does not fit that shape, however good its data.