Apollo.io vs Wiza
An independent, review-free comparison compiled by the SaaSTracker editorial team. Both products are profiled in full, and neither can pay for placement here.
The short answer
Editorial assessmentWiza compared with Apollo.io
Apollo is the everything platform: a huge database plus sequencing, dialing, and enrichment at aggressive prices. Wiza does one thing, verified extraction from LinkedIn, with better accuracy at that specific job and cleaner per-valid pricing. Teams that want a single outbound platform buy Apollo; teams that keep their sequencer and just want the cleanest possible LinkedIn-sourced lists feed them with Wiza.
Choose Apollo.io if
Startups and SMB sales teams that want the largest self-serve contact database and outreach execution in one affordable product.
Choose Wiza if
Recruiters, lean outbound teams, and agencies that prospect from LinkedIn or Sales Navigator at meaningful volume and want verified-at-extraction data with pricing that stops punishing them per record, especially on the unlimited-email annual plans.
Side by side
13 attributes| Attribute | Apollo.io | Wiza |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Data | Data |
| Starting price | Free plan; paid from $49/user/mo (free plan available) | $49/user/mo (Starter); unlimited emails from $990/user/yr (free plan available) |
| Pricing model | Freemium with per-user monthly tiers; credits meter email reveals (generous) and phone/export credits (tighter). Self-serve through Organization tier; custom above. | Per-user plans with two regimes: monthly plans meter valid emails and phone numbers with overage pricing, while annual plans switch to unlimited email reveals (and unlimited phones on the top tier) bounded by a 2,500 exports/month fair-use cap. Credits are only consumed for valid, verified results. |
| Free plan | Free forever: limited credits, 2 sequences, basic filters. | 20 valid emails and 5 phone numbers per month, with basic prospecting features. |
| Free trial | 14 days (of paid features) | No |
| Best for | Startups and SMB sales teams that want the largest self-serve contact database and outreach execution in one affordable product. | Recruiters, lean outbound teams, and agencies that prospect from LinkedIn or Sales Navigator at meaningful volume and want verified-at-extraction data with pricing that stops punishing them per record, especially on the unlimited-email annual plans. |
| Setup time | Minutes to first list on free tier; a week to wire CRM enrichment rules and team sequences properly. | Minutes: install the extension, connect a CRM via OAuth, run a first export. There is no meaningful deployment project even for teams. |
| Learning curve | Low for prospecting; moderate for admin surface (credit policies, enrichment rules, plays). | Very low. If a rep can run a Sales Navigator search, they can use Wiza; the only concepts to learn are credit mechanics and export destinations. |
| Platforms | Web app, Chrome extension, iOS app, REST API | Chrome extension, Web app (Wiza Prospect), API (Team plans) |
| Compliance | SOC 2 Type II, GDPR program, CCPA | GDPR-aligned processes (self-reported), CCPA opt-out handling |
| Founded | 2015 | 2019 |
| Headquarters | San Francisco, California, US | Toronto, Ontario, Canada |
| Ownership | Venture-backed (private) | Bootstrapped, founder-led |
Strengths and limitations
Apollo.io
Strengths
- Unmatched self-serve coverage-per-dollar; the price floor of the entire category.
- Data + engagement in one product removes the export/import loop entirely.
- Free tier and transparent pricing make evaluation frictionless.
- Enrichment/dedupe layer quietly excellent for CRM hygiene.
Limitations
- Direct-dial accuracy trails phone specialists (Lusha, Cognism) in many segments.
- Engagement layer lacks enterprise governance, CI depth, and forecasting.
- Credit mechanics (phone/export) complicate the headline pricing.
- EU data compliance posture is workable but not the selling point Cognism makes it.
Wiza
Strengths
- Verify-at-extraction architecture genuinely delivers on low bounce claims; reviewers routinely place Wiza's valid-email rates at or near the top of the category.
- Only charging for valid results makes advertised volumes map to usable contacts, not attempts.
- Unlimited-email annual pricing ($990/user/year) is the aggressive move in the category and decisively undercuts credit models at volume.
- Recruiting is a first-class use case: Recruiter support plus personal emails and cell numbers serve a segment most B2B data tools treat as an afterthought.
Limitations
- The workflow still assumes LinkedIn (ideally Sales Navigator, a separate cost) as the primary search surface; Wiza Prospect is younger and shallower than dedicated databases as a standalone tool.
- No intent data, no technographics, and thin firmographic filtering compared with UpLead or the enterprise databases.
- Enterprise readiness is limited: no published SOC 2 report or SSO on the marketing site, which stalls security reviews at larger buyers.
- Per-user pricing with a 3-seat Team minimum compounds quickly for larger teams even though per-record cost is low.
Pricing compared
Apollo.io
Freemium with per-user monthly tiers; credits meter email reveals (generous) and phone/export credits (tighter). Self-serve through Organization tier; custom above.
- Free$0
- Basic$49
- Professional$79
- Organization$119
Nothing matches Apollo's coverage-per-dollar; it reset the category's price floor and forced legacy vendors into defensive bundling. The honest caveats: dial accuracy trails specialists, and heavy exporters discover credits are the true price. As a first data stack or a waterfall's volume layer, it remains the obvious call.
Wiza
Per-user plans with two regimes: monthly plans meter valid emails and phone numbers with overage pricing, while annual plans switch to unlimited email reveals (and unlimited phones on the top tier) bounded by a 2,500 exports/month fair-use cap. Credits are only consumed for valid, verified results.
- Free$0
- Starter$49
- Email$99/mo monthly, or $990/year for unlimited
- Email + Phone$199/mo monthly, or $1,990/year for unlimited
- TeamCustom
On annual billing, Wiza's per-record economics are close to unbeatable for LinkedIn-based prospecting: $990 a year for up to 2,500 verified-email exports a month works out to about 3.3 cents per valid email at full utilization, an order of magnitude below UpLead-class credit pricing, with phones-included at double that. Monthly plans are far less interesting, essentially standard per-credit pricing with overage. The costs to weigh are per-seat multiplication across teams, the missing intent and technographic layers, and the dependence on LinkedIn's tolerance of extraction workflows, a structural risk every tool in this niche shares.
Editorial verdict on each
Apollo.io
Category LeaderApollo is the gravitational center of self-serve B2B data: coverage that reset the market's price floor, fused to an engagement layer that genuinely eliminates the export loop for SMBs. Its honest weaknesses, dial accuracy, credit fine print, mid-depth engagement, haven't slowed the flywheel because nothing else offers this much stack per dollar. Start here; add specialists only where measurement says Apollo falls short.
Read the full Apollo.io profileWiza
Wiza is the best pure converter of LinkedIn attention into sendable, verified contact data, and its annual unlimited-email pricing is the sharpest offer in the category for volume prospectors and recruiters. The architecture bet, verify live at extraction and charge only for valid results, delivers exactly the accuracy the marketing claims, and the bootstrapped economics suggest the pricing is durable rather than promotional. What Wiza is not is a full data platform: no intent, no technographics, thin enterprise posture, and a workflow that inherits LinkedIn's platform risk. If your prospecting starts in Sales Navigator, buy it; if it starts with a firmographic query, start elsewhere.
Read the full Wiza profileApollo.io profile last reviewed 2026-08-22; Wiza last reviewed 2026-08-22. Pricing is compiled from public sources and can change without notice. See our methodology.