Make this comparison fit your situation
Three quick choices. No extra page and no hidden score shown.
You work as
Recruitment team
Budget pressure
The static comparison stays the source; this only re-weights the fit for your context.
Apollo.io
Contact database with email and phone data, a Chrome extension and built-in sequencing, priced on credits: 1 per email, 8 per phone number. Free plan gives 900 credits per seat per year; Basic $49, Professional $79, Organization $119 per seat per month on annual billing.
ContactOut
Browser extension and search portal that returns an email address or phone number for a professional profile. Free tier gives 5 emails, 5 phones and 5 exports a day. Paid plans record emails and phones as unmetered but cap exports at 300 or 600 a month, and every self-serve plan is limited to one user per company.
Apollo.io vs ContactOut
Apollo.io consolidates search, contact data and sequencing onto one bill and meters everything in credits where a phone number costs eight emails; ContactOut is a lookup layer with unmetered emails and phones, a hard cap on exports, and one user per company.
Quick verdict
ClearThe evidence points firmly at one of the two for the situations below.
Choose Apollo.io if
- You currently pay for a database, an enrichment tool and a sending tool separately, and consolidating them onto USD 49 per seat per month is the point
- Your outreach is email-first, where a credit buys one address and the yearly grant of 30,000 credits per seat is a large number rather than a ceiling
- More than one recruiter needs access, which ContactOut's self-serve plans do not sell at any price
Choose ContactOut if
- You call candidates, where an unmetered phone number beats one that costs 8 credits against 1 for an email
- You are one recruiter and want to test coverage in your own niche first — five emails, five phone numbers and five exports every day, at no cost
- You hire only in Europe and would rather pay USD 25 than USD 49 for the same Email plan by leaving US and UK data out of it
Neither, if
- Your problem is who to approach rather than how to reach them — both start from a profile you already have, and a sourcing subscription is the missing line
- You need contact details to land in your ATS automatically: Apollo.io's plan table names CRM systems and no recruitment software, and ContactOut puts integrations behind a quote
- Your compliance review needs the provenance of European personal data settled before you start; that is unresolved on both sides here
Summary
Choosing how a recruiter gets a working email address or phone number for someone they have already found
What they have in common
Both hand you contact details for a person you have already identified somewhere else, both run in a browser extension as well as a web app, and both leave the lawful basis for approaching that person entirely with you. Neither finds candidates by skill or experience.
Where they really differ
One is a platform you consolidate onto and one is a layer you bolt on. Apollo.io wants to replace a database, an enrichment tool and a sending tool at USD 49 per seat; ContactOut answers one question in the browser and does not pretend to do the rest.
Who this decision is for
A desk that has already decided where it searches, and is now deciding what the contact-data line in the budget buys — and whether more than one person needs to be on it.
Side by side, on what decides it
The deciding criterion here is: Whether you are buying a consolidated platform for a team or a single-purpose lookup for one person
| Decision factor | Apollo.io | ContactOut |
|---|---|---|
| What a phone number costs | 8 credits, against 1 for an email address | Nothing extra — the plan data records emails and phone numbers as unmetered on paid plans |
| How many people can use it | Per seat: USD 49, 79 or 119, with Organization requiring a minimum of 3 seats | One user per company on every self-serve plan, the free one included; a team is a sales conversation |
| The limit that actually binds | The credit balance, granted per seat per year: 30,000 on Basic, 48,000 on Professional, 72,000 on Organization | Exports: 300 a month on Email and 600 on Email + Phone |
| What the free tier is for | 900 credits per seat per year, granted monthly, with the extensions and two sequences | A daily allowance that renews: 5 emails, 5 phone numbers and 5 exports every day |
| Whether the price is one price | Monthly billing costs 29 percent more, and the page labels the figures introductory | USD 49 is two different products: Email with US and UK data, or Email + Phone without it |
| Getting a candidate into your hiring system | No ATS or recruitment CRM appears on the plan table; the named integrations are sales systems | API, Salesforce and ATS integrations sit on the quoted Team plan, per the vendor |
Also weighs on it: Whether your channel is the phone or the inbox · Whether your work ends in a message or in an exported list · Which regions your candidates are actually in
Commercial facts
Only compare claims that SourcrLab can currently support. Unknowns stay unknown; verify buyer-critical details before purchase.
| Decision factor | Apollo.io | ContactOut |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Freemium (from Free, then from $49/seat/month) | Freemium (from Free, then from $25/month) |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Free trial | Yes | No |
Where Apollo.io wins
Three subscriptions become one
Search, contact data and sequencing live in the same product, with unlimited sequences and mailbox warm-up from the USD 49 plan. For a sourcer currently paying a database, an enrichment tool and a sending tool separately, the comparison is not seat against seat but stack against stack.
A heavy month does not stop the work
Paid plans grant the whole year's credits upfront rather than metering month by month, so a burst of hiring draws down a yearly balance instead of hitting a monthly wall in the second week. That is a real structural difference from competitors that reset every thirty days.
It can be bought for more than one person
Seats are a published price rather than a quote, which sounds unremarkable until you notice the alternative here caps every self-serve plan at one user per company. A second recruiter is a line item on one side and a change of buying route on the other.
Where ContactOut wins
Calling people does not have a tariff
The plan data records emails and, on the Email + Phone plan, phone numbers as unmetered. Against a credit table that charges eight times as much for a number as for an address, a phone-led desk stops doing arithmetic before every lookup, which changes how the tool is actually used.
You can pay less by taking less data
The regional variant excludes US and UK data and halves the price: Email at USD 25 instead of 49, Email + Phone at USD 49 instead of 99. For a recruiter hiring only in Europe that is a saving rather than a downgrade, and no equivalent lever exists on the other side.
The free tier tests the only thing worth testing
Five emails, five phone numbers and five exports every day, renewing rather than counting down, with the extension and the search portal. Coverage in your own niche is the question no review answers for you, and a daily allowance lets you answer it over a fortnight instead of a single sitting.
Trade-offs that apply either way
Neither gets a candidate into your ATS on its own
One lists CRM and sales extensions on its plan table with no recruitment software named, and the other puts integrations behind a quoted Team plan. Whichever you choose, moving a sourced candidate into the system that tracks them is a step you still own.
The advertised price is not the renewal price on either side
Apollo.io's figures assume annual billing and are labelled introductory; ContactOut lists a higher original price beside each current one without saying whether the discount is permanent. Budget for the possibility that year two costs more than year one, and ask in writing.
Personal data you did not collect is your legal problem
Approaching a European candidate on a bought address needs a lawful basis and a privacy notice from you, on either product. Data provenance is recorded as unknown for both, and excluding a region to lower the price changes the invoice rather than the obligation.
Reading the two price models
- Both publish, so this can be modelled — but only after converting to the same unit, because one sells credits and the other sells access with an export cap.
- Model your own mix first. At 1 credit per email and 8 per phone number, a phone-led desk burns a seat's 30,000 credits many times faster than an email-led one, and that single ratio decides which side is cheaper for you.
- Count the people who need access before comparing anything. A three-seat Organization plan starts at USD 4,284 a year, and on the other side a second user is not purchasable on the page at all.
Best by scenario
A solo recruiter working European technology roles by phone
One user is the product's assumption rather than its limit, phone numbers are unmetered, and dropping US and UK data halves the bill for a market they will not use.
A four-person sourcing team running email sequences at volume
Four people cannot buy the alternative on its self-serve plans at all, and an email-first mix is exactly where a 1-credit address and a yearly grant of 30,000 works out.
A team whose shortlist quality is the actual problem
Both begin after discovery. Better contact data on the wrong list produces faster rejection, not better hiring, and the budget belongs upstream.
What this comparison does not know
Unknowns stay unknown. Verify these with the vendor before deciding — they are the gaps that would change the answer.
- European mobile-number coverage on either side
- Data provenance and the lawful basis for EU use, for both
- What Apollo.io does when a seat's yearly credits run out
- What ContactOut's quoted Team plan costs