GTM AI Index
Index GTM data and infrastructure Enrichment › Amplemarket vs Snov.io
Data enrichment · September 2026 Edition

Amplemarket vs Snov.io

One of twelve models named Amplemarket first on the direct prompt; zero named Snov.io. Amplemarket was named by ten of the twelve models and Snov.io by nine and Amplemarket carries 21 labels and Snov.io 15, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Amplemarket

accepted challenger

United States. Named in five categories this edition.

Snov.io

accepted challenger

Named in five categories this edition.

First-choice share7%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate10%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#6A position in a field of 10; printed, not drawn.
Labels2115A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Amplemarket reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Apollo.io was named alongside these two in eleven of the twelve direct answers. Apollo.io vs Amplemarket · Apollo.io vs Snov.io · Clay vs Amplemarket

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the data enrichment page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
AmplemarketFirst choices, of twelve modelsSnov.io
Direct101 against Amplemarket
Paraphrase101 against Amplemarket
Comparative40
Budget-constrained01
Scale-constrained10
Negative20
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.

Every model, every framing

The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Amplemarket and Snov.io stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
Amplemarket Snov.io first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Amplemarket on the left and Snov.io on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Amplemarket and Snov.io stood in it.

Amplemarket first, Snov.io not the choice

1 of 12 modelsSnov.io was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Amplemarket, Apollo.io, Cognism

Neither was the first choice, one was named

2 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
DeepSeek V4 FlashCleanlist alternatives: Apollo.io, Clay, Snov.io, UpLead
MiniMax M2.5Apollo.io, Cleanlist alternatives: Amplemarket, Cognism, ZoomInfo

Neither was named

9 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniApollo.io alternatives: Clearbit/HubSpot-native enrichment, Cognism
Gemini 3.5 FlashApollo.io, Clay alternatives: Cognism, HubSpot Breeze Intelligence
Perplexity SonarApollo.io alternatives: Clay, Cognism, UpLead, ZoomInfo
Grok 4.1 FastApollo.io alternatives: Clay, Cleanlist, UpLead
Mistral SmallApollo.io alternatives: Cleanlist, UpLead
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashApollo.io alternatives: Cognism, HubSpot Breeze Intelligence, UpLead
Kimi K2Apollo.io alternatives: Cleanlist, Cognism, UpLead
GLM 4.7 FlashXApollo.io alternatives: Clay, Cognism, Lusha, UpLead

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Snov.io leads by ten points.
Snov.io12%#2 of 10
Amplemarket2%#– of 10
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Amplemarket leads at mid-market.
Amplemarket7%#3 of 10
Snov.io2%#6 of 10
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Amplemarket leads by twelve points.
Amplemarket12%#3 of 9
Snov.io0%#– of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Amplemarket

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of five in this category shown.

“Pros: Top scores (29/30 data). Cons: Higher cost.” Grok 4.1 Fast · direct prompt · soft negative
“High entry (~$7K/year min, annual only)” Grok 4.1 Fast · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“Amplemarket is the best overall tool, offering high-accuracy enrichment with AI, engagement, deliverability, and intent signals in one platform.” Llama 4 Maverick · comparative prompt · first choice
“For mid-market companies, Apollo.io, Amplemarket, or Cognism offer a good balance of features and price depending on geography.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“some recommended tools include: Amplemarket: Offers curated multi-source enrichment, high accuracy, and engagement data.” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · first choice

What the models said about Snov.io

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.

“Snov.io – Best Overall Value ... offers the best all-around value with email verification, enrichment, and outreach tools bundled together” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
“if your budget is truly under $40/month, Snov.io at $39/month is the best entry point” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · alternative
“lowest-cost alternatives worth considering are Snov.io (from about $39/month)” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · alternative
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.