Apollo.io vs Clay
Compare Apollo.io and Clay on features, pricing, and buyer fit using the same researched criteria.
Apollo.io
Best for
- • Outbound and growth sales teams
- • RevOps teams consolidating data + engagement
- • Buyers who need prospecting more than classic CRM boards
Starting from $49.00/user/mo
Free plan available
VS
Our verdict
There is no universal winner between Apollo.io and Clay. Choose Apollo.io when Outbound and growth sales teams. Choose Clay when GTM engineers and RevOps teams building multi-provider enrichment waterfalls. Criterion scores come from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments and first-party research — not hands-on lab testing.
Apollo.io is better for
- ✓ Ease of use
- ✓ Email outreach
- ✓ Value for money
Clay is better for
- ✓ Prospecting
Tie
- • Integrations
Choose Apollo.io if: Outbound and growth sales teams
Choose Clay if: GTM engineers and RevOps teams building multi-provider enrichment waterfalls
Clay
GTM data enrichment and workflow platform for multi-provider waterfall prospecting — Free + Launch from ~$167/mo headline, Growth, Enterprise.
Best for
- • GTM engineers and RevOps teams building multi-provider enrichment waterfalls
- • Growth teams that want Claygent-style AI research inside prospecting workflows
- • Buyers consolidating many data vendors into one orchestration layer
Starting from $167.00/user/mo
Free plan available
Evidence & transparency
Sources and research process behind this comparison.
Sources
9
Criteria
6
Screenshots
15
Sources consulted
| Title | Product | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Apollo.io Pricing | Apollo.io | official-pricing-page |
| Apollo.io | Apollo.io | official-product-page |
| Apollo Conversations | Apollo.io | official-product-page |
| Clay — Official Site | Clay | official-product-page |
| Clay Pricing | Clay | official-pricing-page |
| Clay Product | Clay | official-product-page |
| Claygent | Clay | official-product-page |
| Clay Integrations | Clay | official-product-page |
| Clay Pricing | Clay | official-product-page |
Methodology steps
- 1Collect first-party product and pricing evidence
- 2Map both products to the same category criteria
- 3Record criterion outcomes with confidence and sources
- 4Publish only when editorial gates allow indexing
Methodology version 1.0.0.
Affiliate relationships never change comparison outcomes. We evaluate both products on the same criteria and allow ties when evidence does not support a universal winner.
Read full methodology →Some visit links may be affiliate links — we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Comparison outcomes are never based on commission.