Apollo.io vs Lusha
Twelve of fourteen models named Apollo.io first on the direct prompt; one named Lusha. Apollo.io was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Lusha by thirteen and Apollo.io carries 68 labels and Lusha 52, so the shares are not directly comparable.
San Francisco, United States, founded 2015. Named in twenty-six categories this edition.
By Lusha Systems, Boston, United States, founded 2016. Named in five categories this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen 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 intelligence and contact data page.
By framing
Apollo.ioFirst choices, of fourteen modelsLusha
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Apollo.io and Lusha were named in the same answer 316 times, of the 1056 answers naming Apollo.io and the 340 naming Lusha. In those answers Lusha took the first choice five times and Apollo.io 161.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | | | | | | |
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | | |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | | | |
Apollo.io Lusha first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Apollo.io on the left and Lusha on the right.The direct prompt
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.Apollo.io first, Lusha an alternative
11 of 14 modelsLusha was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
Apollo.io87%#1 of 10Lusha8%#2 of 10Apollo.io73%#1 of 9Lusha4%#3 of 9What the models said about Apollo.io
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.
“Apollo's data quality issues are well-documented and compound fast, with 20-30% bounce rates being its most critical weakness” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Both had LinkedIn pages yanked in 2024 for scraping violations and terms of service issues” MiniMax M2.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Apollo.io: Best "All-in-One" Platform for Budget-Conscious Mid-Market Teams... Choose Apollo.io. It combines contact databases with sequencing at an unbeatable price point.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“If you're looking for a single platform that gives you both discovery and outreach, go with Apollo.io. It's the go-to all-in-one choice for mid-market teams” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Lusha
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“The credit model can feel like a trap... Users report accuracy has declined, particularly for phone numbers” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“For most SMB and mid-market teams, Lusha is the strongest overall pick” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
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.