SoftwareGlimpse

Clay vs Lusha

Compare Clay and Lusha on features, pricing, and buyer fit using the same researched criteria.

Independently recommendedLast updated Aug 18, 202612 evidence sources16 screenshotsHow we compare
Compare another
Clay logo

Clay

7.3/10

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

Our verdict

No universal winner

There is no universal winner between Clay and Lusha. Choose Clay when GTM engineers and RevOps teams building multi-provider enrichment waterfalls. Choose Lusha when SDR/BDR teams needing verified emails/dials and enrichment. Criterion scores come from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments and first-party research — not hands-on lab testing.

Clay is better for

  • Prospecting
  • Email outreach
  • Value for money

Lusha is better for

  • Ease of use

Tie

  • Integrations

Choose Clay if: GTM engineers and RevOps teams building multi-provider enrichment waterfalls

Choose Lusha if: SDR/BDR teams needing verified emails/dials and enrichment

See detailed comparison ↓
Lusha logo

Lusha

5.6/10

B2B data intelligence platform for verified contact/company data, enrichment, signals, and Engage outreach sequences.

Best for

  • SDR/BDR teams needing verified emails/dials and enrichment
  • RevOps cleaning CRM records and automating enrichment
  • Teams already standardized on Salesforce/HubSpot/Pipedrive

Free plan available

Clay vs Lusha at a glance

Criterion-level leaders from verified research.

Full scorecard →

Scorecard preview

Criterion leaders based on verified research — open the Scorecard tab for evidence detail.

  • Ease of useLusha

    Clay

    Lusha

  • Contact dataDepends

    Clay

    Lusha

  • ProspectingClay

    Clay

    Lusha

  • Email outreachClay

    Clay

    Lusha

  • IntegrationsTie

    Clay

    Lusha

Which sales intelligence is better for you?

Quick picks based on fit — not a universal ranking.

  • Clay

    Best for prospecting

    Clay leads on prospecting (8/10 vs 6/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

  • Clay

    Best for email outreach

    Clay leads on email outreach (8/10 vs 6/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

  • Clay

    Best for value for money

    Clay leads on value for money (7/10 vs 5/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

  • Lusha

    Best for ease of use

    Lusha leads on ease of use (6/10 vs 7/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

The biggest differences

Where the products diverge most clearly on verified criteria.

  • Contact data

    Depends

    Clay

    Clay vs Lusha on contact data is not a scored universal winner in current research — choose by job fit.

    Lusha

    Clay vs Lusha on contact data is not a scored universal winner in current research — choose by job fit.

  • Prospecting

    Clay wins

    Clay

    Clay leads on prospecting (8/10 vs 6/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

    Lusha

    Trails Clay on this criterion

  • Email outreach

    Clay wins

    Clay

    Clay leads on email outreach (8/10 vs 6/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

    Lusha

    Trails Clay on this criterion

  • Integrations

    Tie

    Clay

    Clay and Lusha are close on integrations (7/10 vs 7/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

    Lusha

    Clay and Lusha are close on integrations (7/10 vs 7/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

  • Value for money

    Clay wins

    Clay

    Clay leads on value for money (7/10 vs 5/10) from approved SoftwareGlimpse editorial assessments — not hands-on lab testing.

    Lusha

    Trails Clay on this criterion

Which should you choose?

Choose Clay if

  • 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

Choose Lusha if

  • SDR/BDR teams needing verified emails/dials and enrichment
  • RevOps cleaning CRM records and automating enrichment
  • Teams already standardized on Salesforce/HubSpot/Pipedrive

How we compare

A short look at the comparison process. Full methodology

  1. 1

    Collect

    Collect official product information, pricing, and product evidence.

  2. 2

    Normalize

    Map evidence to the same category evaluation criteria for both products.

  3. 3

    Compare

    Evaluate both products against identical criteria — ties and depends are allowed.

  4. 4

    Explain

    Show why each product wins, loses, or ties, with evidence behind the outcome.

Still deciding between Clay and Lusha?

Use Best sales intelligence software for a shortlist matched to your priorities, or build another side-by-side comparison.

  • Independent criterion outcomes
  • No invented scores or prices
  • Affiliate links never change winners

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.

Affiliate disclosure: some links may be affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Rankings and scores are never based on commission. Full disclosure

Methodology disclosure: scores and recommendations follow SoftwareGlimpse evaluation criteria (version 1.0.0). Affiliate relationships do not determine rankings.

How we recommend: product claims are tied to recorded research where available.

AI-assisted disclosure: drafts may be AI-assisted from approved facts and assessments. Humans approve publishable editorial judgments. AI does not invent live prices or claim hands-on testing.