Skip to content
SourcrLab

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.

All comparisons
Apollo.io logo

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.

VS
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) logo

Juicebox (PeopleGPT)

AI-powered people search engine using natural language. Search 800M+ profiles by describing your ideal candidate instead of Boolean strings.

Apollo.io vs Juicebox (PeopleGPT)

Decision guidance

**Pick Apollo.io if:** - You need email sequences and multi-touch campaigns built in - Your team already thinks in filters, tags, and CRM workflows - You're hiring volume roles where outreach automation pays off **Pick Juicebox (PeopleGPT) if:** - You hate Boolean strings and want plain-English search - You prioritize search speed over engagement automation - You're a small team sourcing niche technical or executive roles **Skip both if:** - You hire fewer than 3 roles per quarter; neither database ROI justifies the spend **Verdict:** Apollo for recruiters who manage pipelines like salespeople; Juicebox for sourcers who just want better candidates without the syntax tax.

Summary

Apollo.io and Juicebox (PeopleGPT) both search massive contact databases (275M vs 800M profiles), but they're built for different sourcing workflows. Apollo is a sales tool repurposed for recruiting: you get robust filters, email sequences, and LinkedIn scraping via Chrome extension. It's structured search with intent signals layered on top. Juicebox is recruiting-first AI: you describe candidates in plain language ("senior Ruby developers in Austin who contribute to open source") and it translates that into results without Boolean gymnastics. Apollo's strength is multi-channel engagement after you find someone; Juicebox's is faster initial discovery when you don't want to build complex queries. The real split is workflow preference. Apollo works like a CRM with sourcing bolted on: you'll spend time managing sequences, tracking touchpoints, organizing candidate pipelines. Juicebox is leaner, focused on the search-to-shortlist moment. Apollo's $49 entry point includes more automation tools (drip campaigns, A/B testing); Juicebox at $79 prioritizes AI-assisted search quality and enrichment. Both suffer the same data freshness issues (outdated emails, stale job titles), but Juicebox's natural language interface means less time debugging why your Boolean string returned 12,000 irrelevant profiles. If you're hiring 5+ roles monthly and need outreach automation, Apollo justifies itself. If you're a lean team drowning in Boolean syntax who just needs better candidates faster, Juicebox cuts that friction.

Side-by-Side Comparison

Only compare claims that SourcrLab can currently support. Unknowns stay unknown; verify buyer-critical details before purchase.

Decision factorApollo.ioJuicebox (PeopleGPT)
PricingFreemium (from Free, then from $49/seat/month)Freemium (from Free, then from $99/seat/month)
Free planYesYes
Free trialYesNo
Key features
  • Contact database with email and phone data, unlocked per credit
  • Chrome, Gmail and Salesforce extensions
  • Unlimited email sequences with deliverability tooling, from the Basic plan
  • CRM integrations and waterfall enrichment, from the Basic plan
  • Automated workflows and call recording, from the Professional plan
  • SSO and advanced security settings, from the Organization plan
  • AI-powered candidate search
  • Boolean search builder
  • Candidate data enrichment
  • Contact info finder (email & phone)
  • LinkedIn integration
  • Talent pool management
Best for
  • Sourcers who work primarily by email
  • Teams that want search, contact data and sequencing on one bill
  • Anyone who can model their monthly credit burn before buying
  • Corporate recruiting teams
  • Staffing agencies
  • Tech recruiters
  • Sourcers
Pros None listed None listed
Trade-offs
  • A phone number costs 8 credits against 1 for an email, which suits sales more than phone-led recruitment
  • No ATS or recruitment CRM integration is listed on the plan table
  • The product is organised around a sales pipeline, so a recruiter translates constantly
  • Organization, the plan with SSO, has a three-seat minimum
  • Quoted prices assume annual billing and are labelled introductory
  • Approaching candidates from a bought contact database needs your own lawful basis in the EU
  • The origin of the aggregated profile data is not documented, which is a real problem under EU rules
  • Contact credits and exports are capped well below the unlimited search
  • ATS and CRM integrations only exist on the custom Business plan
  • The AI agents are a separate $199 per month subscription

Google Preferred Sources

Find trusted recruitment-tech research faster

Add SourcrLab as one of your preferred sources in Google, so our comparisons, guides and research are easier to spot when you search — in AI Overviews, AI Mode and Top Stories. You confirm it in Google, no account details are shared with us, and you can change your sources there at any time.

Add SourcrLab in Google
Visit Apollo.ioVisit Juicebox (PeopleGPT)

Explore Related Comparisons & Tools