Enrich vs FullEnrich
An independent, review-free comparison compiled by the SaaSTracker editorial team. Both products are profiled in full, and neither can pay for placement here.
Still shortlisting? Browse the best in B2B Data Providers for every option we track, with award winners called out.
The short answer
Both sides assessedEnrich compared with FullEnrich
Both are API-first, but FullEnrich sells a verified waterfall across twenty-five external sources with a verified-or-free guarantee, personal emails, and an MCP server on every tier, at 5.5 cents per work email. Enrich sells its own database at roughly half a cent. FullEnrich is the safer product with the clearer terms; Enrich is an order of magnitude cheaper on paper. Run both against the same thousand records before deciding, because the coverage difference is the entire argument.
FullEnrich compared with Enrich
Both are API-first, but they price very differently. Enrich charges ten credits per email against a 100,000 credit pool for 49 dollars, an order of magnitude cheaper per record on paper, and 500 credits per phone. FullEnrich runs a longer verified waterfall, offers personal emails and an MCP server, and guarantees you pay nothing for unverified data. Price-led API buyers should test Enrich first; teams that need verified coverage and AI-assistant access should pay FullEnrich's premium.
Choose Enrich if
Developers and technical teams that consume enrichment programmatically and want the lowest cost per API call, particularly anyone running high-volume validation or building enrichment into a product rather than into a sales workflow.
Choose FullEnrich if
Teams that need high coverage on both emails and mobile numbers from one vendor and want to consume enrichment programmatically, especially developers and GTM engineers building pipelines or wiring data into an AI assistant through MCP.
Side by side
13 attributes| Attribute | Enrich | FullEnrich |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Data | Data |
| Starting price | $49 per month (Growth plan, 100,000 credits) (free plan available) | $0 (Free, 50 starter credits), then $29 per month (Pro, 500 credits), or $26 per month billed yearly |
| Pricing model | Monthly credit plans with per-endpoint credit costs drawn from one pool, unlimited seats and no contract, top-ups at the plan rate, and annual billing on Scale and Pro at about two months off. | Freemium subscription with a published credit ladder to 100,000 credits a month and quoted volume above it, priced from a single credit pool where different data types consume different credit amounts and unverifiable results cost nothing. |
| Free plan | No permanent free plan; the 100 signup credits are one-time. | 50 starter credits with waterfall enrichment and MCP server access, extendable through referral credits. |
| Free trial | 100 free credits with no credit card required | 50 credits on signup with no credit card required |
| Best for | Developers and technical teams that consume enrichment programmatically and want the lowest cost per API call, particularly anyone running high-volume validation or building enrichment into a product rather than into a sales workflow. | Teams that need high coverage on both emails and mobile numbers from one vendor and want to consume enrichment programmatically, especially developers and GTM engineers building pipelines or wiring data into an AI assistant through MCP. |
| Setup time | Under an hour for a developer: sign up, take the 100 free credits, call an endpoint, map the response. The Workbench spreadsheet is there if you want it, but most teams start from the API. | Ten minutes for a CSV run or a Clay column, under an hour for the API, and a few minutes for the MCP server, which is the fastest path to useful for anyone already working in an AI assistant. |
| Learning curve | Low for engineers, awkward for everyone else. The essential thing to internalise is the credit table, because a phone lookup costs fifty times an email lookup and five hundred times a validation, and a team that does not model its endpoint mix will misjudge a plan by an order of magnitude. | Low, provided the team learns the credit table. The ten-to-one mobile rate and the three-to-one personal email rate mean a plan's usable size depends entirely on the mix, and teams that assume every output costs one credit will exhaust an allowance in days. |
| Platforms | REST API, Web application, Bulk processing, No-code integrations | Web application, Chrome extension, CSV upload, REST APIs, MCP server, Clay integration |
| Compliance | SOC 2 (stated on the pricing page), GDPR (stated on the pricing page) | SOC 2 Type II, GDPR, CCPA, Data processing agreement available |
| Founded | 2023 | 2023 |
| Headquarters | Dubai, United Arab Emirates | San Francisco, United States (founded in France) |
| Ownership | Venture-backed (early stage) | Venture-backed (seed) |
Strengths and limitations
Enrich
Strengths
- The cheapest published rates in this batch: roughly half a cent per email lookup and around 10 to 25 cents per phone number, well below single-source and waterfall competitors alike.
- Per-endpoint credit pricing means validation at one credit costs a tenth of a lookup, which makes bulk list hygiene nearly free rather than a second subscription.
- No per-seat fees and no contract, so a twelve-person team pays the same as one person and the monthly price needs no annual commitment to unlock.
- Genuinely API-first, with structured responses across emails, phones, titles, company data, and social profiles rather than an API bolted onto a web app.
Limitations
- Unused credits do not roll over, which penalises lumpy usage.
- API rate limits are not prominently documented, which is a problem for anyone planning a high-throughput pipeline.
- The operating entity is registered in Dubai rather than in the EEA, which is a materially weaker starting point for a European data protection review than Dropcontact, Icypeas, or BetterContact.
- The pricing page states SOC 2 and GDPR compliance and offers SSO and a custom security review on Enterprise, but no ISO 27001 or audit report is published on the site.
FullEnrich
Strengths
- Twenty-five plus providers in one waterfall, available on every tier including free, which is broader than most competitors and not gated behind an upgrade.
- Verified or it is free is the strongest available billing guarantee, and the granular credit table lets you model a month's spend precisely before committing.
- An MCP server on all tiers, including the free plan, is the most complete answer in this category to how enrichment plugs into an AI assistant.
- Three separate APIs, for enrichment, search, and reverse email lookup, rather than a single endpoint bolted onto a web app.
Limitations
- Per-credit pricing falls slowly with volume, from 5.8 cents at 500 credits to 5 cents at 10,000, so heavy users pay close to list rates unless they go to Enterprise.
- At 5.5 cents per verified work email the entry rate is among the most expensive here, several times what a single-source vendor charges.
- Bring-your-own provider keys, the feature that fixes the unit economics at volume, is Enterprise-only, as are custom rate limits and custom-IdP SSO.
- The waterfall abstracts which of twenty-five providers supplied a given record, which will not satisfy a strict data provenance policy.
Pricing compared
Enrich
Monthly credit plans with per-endpoint credit costs drawn from one pool, unlimited seats and no contract, top-ups at the plan rate, and annual billing on Scale and Pro at about two months off.
- Free credits$0
- Growth$49
- Scale$149
- Pro$499
On published numbers Enrich is the cheapest option in this batch by a wide margin: about half a cent per email lookup at the Growth plan, roughly a tenth of what Hunter charges and a twentieth of what a waterfall charges, with phone numbers at around 10 to 25 cents against 33 to 55 cents elsewhere. Validation at one credit makes bulk hygiene almost free. The value is real for an API consumer with no need for a workspace. The reason to be careful is that two of the variables that determine actual cost, whether failed lookups burn credits and whether credits expire, are not published, and a single unanswered 500-credit phone miss policy could move the true cost per number by a large multiple. Test both on the free credits, get the answers in writing, and if they come back the way the pricing implies, this is the best price per record here.
FullEnrich
Freemium subscription with a published credit ladder to 100,000 credits a month and quoted volume above it, priced from a single credit pool where different data types consume different credit amounts and unverifiable results cost nothing.
- Free$0
- ProFrom $29
- EnterpriseCustom
At 1,000 lookups the Pro plan costs 55 dollars, or 5.5 cents per verified work email, which is roughly six times Icypeas and slightly more than BetterContact's entry rate. At 10,000 the plan is 499 dollars a month, about 5 cents a credit, so the price per record falls only modestly with volume. What the premium buys is coverage from twenty-five sources, a floor on waste because unverified results are free, personal emails and reverse lookup as distinct priced outputs, company data at a quarter credit, and an MCP server on every tier. For an international list or an agentic workflow that is a genuinely differentiated package. For a well-covered domestic list, you are paying waterfall prices for a problem you do not have.
Editorial verdict on each
Enrich
Enrich is the cheapest way to get contact data by the request, and it is honest about what it is: an API with a website attached. Half a cent per email lookup, one credit for a validation, phones at around 15 to 25 cents, no seat fees, and no contract make it the obvious first test for any developer building enrichment into a pipeline or a product. Two things stop it being an unqualified recommendation. Credits do not roll over, which punishes lumpy usage, though failed lookups are never charged. And an operating entity in Dubai whose GDPR position is stated rather than documented in depth is a weaker starting point for contacting people in Europe than an EU-hosted vendor. For steady, programmatic volume it is the best price per record in this category.
Read the full Enrich profileFullEnrich
FullEnrich is the most technically ambitious of the small waterfall vendors. Twenty-five sources on every tier including free, a granular published credit table, a verified-or-free billing rule, personal emails and reverse lookup as distinct outputs, company data at a quarter credit, and an MCP server that lets an AI assistant call enrichment directly. With roughly two million dollars of seed funding behind it and Mastercard and DocuSign on the customer list, it is also better capitalised than most of its peers. Buy it if you work international lists, if you consume data programmatically, or if you want enrichment available to an agent rather than to a person. The thing to weigh is the price, about 5 to 6 cents per verified work email across the published ladder, which only drops meaningfully above 50,000 credits a month.
Read the full FullEnrich profileEnrich profile last reviewed 2026-09-26; FullEnrich last reviewed 2026-09-26. Pricing is compiled from public sources and can change without notice. See our methodology.
The best in B2B Data Providers
26 trackedB2B data providers supply the contact and company information (emails, phone numbers, firmographics, and buying signals) that feeds prospecting lists and enrichment workflows.
The largest self-serve contact database in the category, fused with sequencing, data and execution in one product.
Accurate direct dials and a genuinely usable free tier make Lusha the lowest-friction entry point into paid B2B data.
Founded in 2022 and already at 40,000 users, Prospeo shipped AI Search, lookalikes, and an MCP server in 2025 as its database passed 280M leads.
Semantic search over the live web with contact data attached made prospecting a language problem rather than a database subscription.
Signup to verified emails in five minutes with zero configuration, and failed searches cost nothing, so nobody needs training to get value from Anymailfinder.
Frequently asked questions
6 questionsWhat is the difference between Enrich and FullEnrich?
Both are API-first, but FullEnrich sells a verified waterfall across twenty-five external sources with a verified-or-free guarantee, personal emails, and an MCP server on every tier, at 5.5 cents per work email. Enrich sells its own database at roughly half a cent. FullEnrich is the safer product with the clearer terms; Enrich is an order of magnitude cheaper on paper. Run both against the same thousand records before deciding, because the coverage difference is the entire argument.
Is Enrich or FullEnrich cheaper?
Enrich starts at $49 per month (Growth plan, 100,000 credits) (free plan available). FullEnrich starts at $0 (Free, 50 starter credits), then $29 per month (Pro, 500 credits), or $26 per month billed yearly. The billing models differ, so the entry price is rarely the whole cost. Enrich pricing model: Monthly credit plans with per-endpoint credit costs drawn from one pool, unlimited seats and no contract, top-ups at the plan rate, and annual billing on Scale and Pro at about two months off. FullEnrich pricing model: Freemium subscription with a published credit ladder to 100,000 credits a month and quoted volume above it, priced from a single credit pool where different data types consume different credit amounts and unverifiable results cost nothing.
Does Enrich or FullEnrich have a free plan?
Enrich has a free plan. No permanent free plan; the 100 signup credits are one-time. Trial terms: 100 free credits with no credit card required. FullEnrich has a free plan. 50 starter credits with waterfall enrichment and MCP server access, extendable through referral credits. Trial terms: 50 credits on signup with no credit card required.
Who should choose Enrich?
Developers and technical teams that consume enrichment programmatically and want the lowest cost per API call, particularly anyone running high-volume validation or building enrichment into a product rather than into a sales workflow.
Who should choose FullEnrich?
Teams that need high coverage on both emails and mobile numbers from one vendor and want to consume enrichment programmatically, especially developers and GTM engineers building pipelines or wiring data into an AI assistant through MCP.
What are the best alternatives to Enrich and FullEnrich?
SaaSTracker profiles 26 products in B2B Data Providers. The Summer 2026 awards in the category went to Apollo.io (Category Leader), Lusha (Best Value), Prospeo (Momentum). Every profile is compiled from primary sources, so a shortlist can be built from pricing, limitations, and fit rather than from star ratings.
