GTM AI Index
Index Sales Sales engagement › Apollo.io vs HubSpot Sales Hub
Sales engagement platforms · September 2026 Edition

Apollo.io vs HubSpot Sales Hub

Five of twelve models named Apollo.io first on the direct prompt; zero named HubSpot Sales Hub. Both were named by all twelve models and Apollo.io carries 57 labels and HubSpot Sales Hub 48, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Apollo.io

endorsed leader

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

HubSpot Sales Hub

accepted challenger

By HubSpot, Cambridge, United States, founded 2006. Named in sixteen categories this edition.

First-choice share33%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate16%4%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#4A position in a field of 10; printed, not drawn.
Labels5748A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Apollo.io reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Salesloft was named alongside these two in twelve of the twelve direct answers. Salesloft vs Apollo.io · Salesloft vs HubSpot Sales Hub · Apollo.io vs Outreach

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 sales engagement platforms page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Apollo.ioFirst choices, of twelve modelsHubSpot Sales Hub
Direct50
Paraphrase43
Comparative10
Budget-constrained611 against Apollo.io
Scale-constrained10
Negative018 against Apollo.io · 2 against HubSpot Sales Hub
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.

Across every category in the September 2026 Edition, Apollo.io and HubSpot Sales Hub were named in the same answer 128 times, of the 858 answers naming Apollo.io and the 501 naming HubSpot Sales Hub. In those answers HubSpot Sales Hub took the first choice twenty-two times and Apollo.io forty-two.

Every model, every framing

The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Apollo.io and HubSpot Sales Hub 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
Apollo.io HubSpot Sales Hub first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Apollo.io on the left and HubSpot Sales Hub on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Apollo.io first, HubSpot Sales Hub an alternative

5 of 12 modelsHubSpot Sales Hub was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Mistral SmallApollo.io alternatives: Outreach, Salesloft
DeepSeek V4 FlashApollo.io alternatives: Groove, HubSpot Sales Hub, Salesloft
Llama 4 MaverickApollo.io, Outreach, Salesloft
Kimi K2Apollo.io alternatives: Outreach, Salesloft
GLM 4.7 FlashXApollo.io alternatives: Salesloft

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: Apollo.io, HubSpot Sales Hub, Outreach, Salesloft
GPT-5.4 miniSalesloft alternatives: HubSpot Sales Hub, Outreach
Gemini 3.5 FlashSalesloft alternatives: Apollo.io, HubSpot Sales Hub
Perplexity SonarSalesloft alternatives: Apollo.io, HubSpot Sales Hub, Outreach
Grok 4.1 FastSalesloft alternatives: Apollo.io, HubSpot Sales Hub
Qwen 3.7 FlashSalesloft alternatives: HubSpot Sales Hub, Klenty, Outreach
MiniMax M2.5Outreach alternatives: Apollo.io, Salesloft

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 forty points.
Apollo.io50%#1 of 13
HubSpot Sales Hub10%#3 of 13
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Apollo.io leads by twenty-five points.
Apollo.io33%#2 of 10
HubSpot Sales Hub8%#4 of 10
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: HubSpot Sales Hub leads at enterprise.
HubSpot Sales Hub10%#4 of 7
Apollo.io2%#5 of 7
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Apollo.io

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

“Apollo.io is the most cost-effective platform on the market because it consolidates your contact database and your outreach tool into one platform.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about HubSpot Sales Hub

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

“Never use for cold email: HubSpot Sales Hub” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“some features are only accessible in high-tier plans, which can be costly, and the platform can sometimes be slow” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · soft negative
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.