GTM AI Index
Index Sales Intent data › ZoomInfo vs Dealfront
B2B intent data providers · September 2026 Edition

ZoomInfo vs Dealfront

One of twelve models named ZoomInfo first on the direct prompt; zero named Dealfront. ZoomInfo was named by twelve of the twelve models and Dealfront by eleven and both carry 37 labels, so the shares below are directly comparable.

ZoomInfo

criticized challenger

Vancouver, Washington, United States, founded 2000. Named in eighteen categories this edition.

Dealfront

accepted challenger

Named in eight categories this edition.

First-choice share4%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate30%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels3737Equal, which is what makes the shares comparable.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, ZoomInfo 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 ZoomInfo · Bombora vs Dealfront · Apollo.io vs ZoomInfo

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.
ZoomInfoFirst choices, of twelve modelsDealfront
Direct10
Paraphrase102 against ZoomInfo
Comparative00
Budget-constrained003 against ZoomInfo
Scale-constrained01
Negative006 against ZoomInfo
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 ZoomInfo and Dealfront 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
ZoomInfo Dealfront first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, ZoomInfo on the left and Dealfront on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where ZoomInfo and Dealfront stood in it.

ZoomInfo first, Dealfront not the choice

1 of 12 modelsDealfront was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Kimi K2Bombora, ZoomInfo alternatives: AdRoll ABM, Demandbase, G2 Buyer Intent

Neither was the first choice, one was named

7 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice alternatives: Cognism, Dealfront, Demandbase, Intentsify
Perplexity SonarBombora alternatives: 6sense, Dealfront, G2 Buyer Intent
Grok 4.1 FastBombora alternatives: AdRoll ABM, Dealfront, G2 Buyer Intent, ZoomInfo
Mistral SmallMarketBetter alternatives: Apollo.io, Dealfront, Factors.ai
DeepSeek V4 FlashBombora, G2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Intentsify, ZoomInfo
Llama 4 MaverickBombora, Intentsify alternatives: Abmatic AI, Cognism, Dealfront
GLM 4.7 FlashXApollo.io alternatives: Dealfront, G2 Buyer Intent, RB2B

Neither was named

4 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniBombora alternatives: 6sense, AdRoll ABM, Demandbase, G2 Buyer Intent
Gemini 3.5 FlashApollo.io, HubSpot Breeze Intelligence alternatives: Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent, RB2B, Warmly
Qwen 3.7 FlashBombora alternatives: AdRoll ABM, Factors.ai, G2 Buyer Intent, Intentsify, Warmly
MiniMax M2.5Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Apollo Intent, Factors.ai, 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
Dealfront leads by thirteen points.
Dealfront13%#2 of 14
ZoomInfo0%#13 of 14
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: ZoomInfo leads at mid-market.
ZoomInfo4%#5 of 14
Dealfront2%#6 of 14
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
ZoomInfo leads by two points.
ZoomInfo2%#4 of 9
Dealfront0%#– of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about ZoomInfo

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

“here are the B2B intent data providers ... you should approach with caution ... ZoomInfo (Specifically "Streaming Intent") ... High False Positive Rate” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“ZoomInfo Intent: Streaming signals criticized as lowest quality (Bombora-resold + web), inaccurate revenue/employee data, buggy.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · hard negative

What the models said about Dealfront

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

“favor scalable mid-market fits like Bombora or Dealfront” Grok 4.1 Fast · scale prompt · first choice
“Best for SMBs and mid-market teams with established website traffic wanting affordable visitor identification.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · alternative
“If you need a simpler solution focused just on website visitor identification, Dealfront is excellent.” Mistral Small · direct 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.