Exa vs Tomba

Exa compared with Tomba

Both are API-first with flat published usage pricing and no tier ladder, and both are honest about what they charge for. Tomba is far cheaper for the specific job of turning a name and a domain into a verified email, at 0.0089 against Exa's 0.02, and ships ten SDKs across fourteen endpoints. Exa cannot be beaten on discovering which companies to target in the first place. The sensible answer for many teams is both: Exa to build the set, Tomba to resolve the addresses.

Tomba compared with Exa

Both are API-first with published usage pricing, but they answer different questions. Exa searches the live web semantically and enriches what it finds, at 7 dollars per thousand searches with contact enrichment at 0.02 for an email and 0.07 for a phone. Tomba queries a pre-built index of published addresses at roughly 1 to 5 cents per email depending on plan size. Exa is better when you do not yet know which companies you want; Tomba is much cheaper once you do.

Exa

Pure pay-as-you-go usage pricing with every operation individually published, no subscription, no minimum spend, no tiers, and no expiring credits.

• Free credits$0
• Search$7
• Contents and Answer$1 to $5
• Deep Search and Monitors$12 to $15
• Agent$0.012 to $1.00
• EnterpriseCustom

Compared as a contact data vendor, Exa is expensive: 1,000 emails costs 20 dollars against Tomba's 49 dollar Basic plan, which covers 2,500, and 10,000 costs 200 against Tomba's 199 dollar Pro plan, which covers 20,000. Phone numbers at 0.07 are 70 dollars per thousand and 700 per ten thousand, more than CUFinder's 299 for 10,000 mixed credits and well above SalesQL's 119 for 12,000. On that axis Exa loses to most of this batch. But that comparison misreads the product. What you are actually buying is the ability to find companies that no filter can describe, verify each one against your own criteria, and only then pay to enrich the survivors, with a research and monitoring layer on the same bill and no subscription underneath any of it. Nothing else in this category does that at any price. For a team whose bottleneck is knowing who to contact rather than how to reach them, 7 dollars per thousand searches with 10 dollars free every month is exceptional value. For a team that already has the list, it is simply the wrong tool.

Tomba

Named monthly credit plans on a volume slider, each split evenly between finder and verification credits, sold as a subscription (three months free on yearly billing) or as a one-time block, with an annual-contract Enterprise tier above.

• Free$0
• Basic$49
• Growth$89
• Pro and largerFrom $199
• Enterprise$2,499

Tomba is the cheapest published per-unit price in this batch and one of the cheapest anywhere self-serve. At 1,000 verified emails a month the smallest plan, Basic at 49 dollars, is the floor, so small users pay about 0.049 per address, more than Skrapp at 0.0145. At 10,000 emails a month the Pro plan at 199 dollars covers it with 20,000 finder credits, about 0.02 per address at that volume and falling at the larger steps, which is competitive with Hunter's Growth tier at 149 euros. Phone numbers cost five credits each, several times SalesQL's single-credit pool. The honest summary is that Tomba is a good price per email at volume, an unremarkable one at small volume, and a middling price per phone, and it is worth the switch mainly if you are calling the API rather than clicking a button, because the interface does not justify the move on its own.