COMPARISON · DACH
LeadHunt vs Clay
Feature comparison from docs/COMPETITORS.md. LeadHunt focuses on registry-verified DACH lists with sources — not a generic global contact database.
Prices are approximate 2026 list prices from public comparisons — verify on each vendor’s pricing page before quoting a customer.
| Feature | Clay | LeadHunt / LeadMine (STARTEND) |
|---|---|---|
| Self-serve signup (Google Sign-In) | yes | auth configured, unverified end-to-end |
| Self-serve checkout | yes | smoke+pilot Price IDs; live POST when Railway Price vars set |
| Company + persona search by ICP | yes | GLEIF acquisition enabled; search worker not configured |
| Email verification / bounce guard | via providers | spec: bounce cap 2% (OUTBOUND_REQUIREMENTS) |
| Phone numbers | via providers | no |
| Enrichment waterfall (multi-source) | yes | no |
| Freshness timestamps per field | partial | spec: first_seen_at / verified_at / last_seen_at |
| Lawful basis + suppression history | no | spec: lawful_basis + suppression fields |
| CSV / CRM export | yes | paid CSV on /order/:id; workspace export |
| Continuous refill for an initiative | via scheduled tables | core promise (CHF 990/month managed refill) |
| DACH / Swiss company coverage | via providers | GLEIF + Swiss sources |
Proposed 10× angles
- PROPOSED — Provable Swiss list with source_url, verified_at, lawful_basis
- PROPOSED — Initiative refill (delta, not a static database)
- PROPOSED — Swiss registry depth (Zefix/GLEIF signals)
Also compare: Apollo · Clay · Cognism · Explee · Referral · Case study