Clay vs Gong
Compare Clay and Gong on features, pricing, and buyer fit using the same researched criteria.
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
VS
Our verdict
There is no universal winner between Clay and Gong. Choose Clay when GTM engineers and RevOps teams building multi-provider enrichment waterfalls. Choose Gong when Revenue teams whose primary job is conversation intelligence and deal coaching. Criterion scores come from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments and first-party research — not hands-on lab testing.
Clay is better for
- ✓ Contact data
- ✓ Prospecting
- ✓ Email outreach
- ✓ Value for money
Gong is better for
- ✓ Ease of use
- ✓ Integrations
Choose Clay if: GTM engineers and RevOps teams building multi-provider enrichment waterfalls
Choose Gong if: Revenue teams whose primary job is conversation intelligence and deal coaching
Gong
Conversation intelligence / revenue AI — per-user licenses + platform fee; custom proposal only (no public dollar list).
Best for
- • Revenue teams whose primary job is conversation intelligence and deal coaching
- • Orgs layering Gong beside CRM + SEP (Outreach/Salesloft)
- • Buyers who need call/meeting insight — not contact discovery
No free plan
Comparison scorecard
Criterion-by-criterion results for Clay and Gong. Numeric bars appear only when both products have approved scores.
- Gong
Ease of use
How quickly teams become productive.
Gong leads on ease of use (6/10 vs 7/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.
Clay6/10Gong7/10 - Clay
Contact data
Coverage and quality of contact data.
Clay leads on contact data (8/10 vs 2/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.
Clay8/10Gong2/10 - Clay
Prospecting
Prospecting workflow strength.
Clay leads on prospecting (8/10 vs 3/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.
Clay8/10Gong3/10 - Clay
Email outreach
Outreach sequencing and deliverability tooling.
Clay leads on email outreach (8/10 vs 3/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.
Clay8/10Gong3/10 - Gong
Integrations
Important third-party integrations.
Gong leads on integrations (7/10 vs 8/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.
ClayWeakerGongStronger - Clay
Value for money
Capability relative to total cost of ownership.
Clay leads on value for money (7/10 vs 4/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.
Clay7/10Gong4/10
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.