GTM AI Index
Index Sales Intent data › Bombora vs Apollo.io
B2B intent data providers · September 2026 Edition

Bombora vs Apollo.io

Eight of twelve models named Bombora first on the direct prompt; two named Apollo.io. Bombora was named by twelve of the twelve models and Apollo.io by eleven and Bombora carries 56 labels and Apollo.io 27, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Bombora

endorsed leader

Named in six categories this edition.

Apollo.io

accepted challenger

San Francisco, United States, founded 2015. Named in twenty categories this edition.

First-choice share35%25%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate18%7%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#2A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels5627A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Bombora reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.G2 Buyer Intent was named alongside these two in nine of the twelve direct answers. Bombora vs G2 Buyer Intent · Apollo.io vs G2 Buyer Intent

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 B2B intent data providers page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
BomboraFirst choices, of twelve modelsApollo.io
Direct82
Paraphrase91
Comparative60
Budget-constrained0108 against Bombora
Scale-constrained10
Negative102 against Bombora · 2 against Apollo.io
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.

The direct prompt

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

Bombora first, Apollo.io not the choice

8 of 12 modelsApollo.io was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GPT-5.4 miniBombora alternatives: 6sense, AdRoll ABM, Demandbase, G2 Buyer Intent
Perplexity SonarBombora alternatives: 6sense, Dealfront, G2 Buyer Intent
Grok 4.1 FastBombora alternatives: AdRoll ABM, Dealfront, G2 Buyer Intent, ZoomInfo
DeepSeek V4 FlashBombora, G2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Intentsify, ZoomInfo
Llama 4 MaverickBombora, Intentsify alternatives: Abmatic AI, Cognism, Dealfront
Qwen 3.7 FlashBombora alternatives: AdRoll ABM, Factors.ai, G2 Buyer Intent, Intentsify, Warmly
Kimi K2Bombora, ZoomInfo alternatives: AdRoll ABM, Demandbase, G2 Buyer Intent
MiniMax M2.5Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Apollo Intent, Factors.ai, Intentsify

Apollo.io first, Bombora an alternative

2 of 12 modelsBombora was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Gemini 3.5 FlashApollo.io, HubSpot Breeze Intelligence alternatives: Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent, RB2B, Warmly
GLM 4.7 FlashXApollo.io alternatives: Dealfront, G2 Buyer Intent, RB2B

Neither was the first choice, one was named

1 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Mistral SmallMarketBetter alternatives: Apollo.io, Dealfront, Factors.ai

Neither was named

1 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice alternatives: Cognism, Dealfront, Demandbase, Intentsify

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
Apollo.io leads by fifty-two points.
Apollo.io56%#1 of 14
Bombora4%#6 of 14
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Bombora leads at mid-market.
Bombora35%#1 of 14
Apollo.io25%#2 of 14
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Bombora leads by eighteen points.
Bombora20%#3 of 9
Apollo.io2%#– of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Bombora

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

“Avoid: Enterprise platforms like ... Bombora ($25K-$75K/year)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · hard negative
“What to Avoid on a Limited Budget ... Bombora (~$25K+/yr)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Skip the enterprise platforms (Bombora, 6sense, Demandbase, ZoomInfo) unless you have five-figure annual budget” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“For pure lead generation/scoring: Go with Bombora. It provides the cleanest, most standardized dataset for most mid-market ABM strategies.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“The industry standard for third-party cooperative intent... The "market standard" co-op network used by most large enterprises.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Bombora is widely considered the industry standard and best starting point due to its data quality, coverage, and integrations” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Apollo.io

No label in this category carried a quote.

Also compared

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