Email and phone enrichment

This is where most of the money in prospecting is spent, and where most of it is wasted. The job is simple to state: turn a name and a company into an email address and a mobile number that actually work. Three things decide the cost. First, whether the provider bills on results or on attempts. Billing on result means a bad list costs nothing to try; billing per row queried means you pay for every miss, and on European mobile data the miss rate is high. Second, the hit rate on your own market, which is the only benchmark that predicts anything. A provider at half the price that finds a third as many contacts is more expensive per usable contact, and the invoice will never show you that. Third, the order you call providers in. Cheapest first, stop at the first hit, and let the expensive one meet only the rows nobody else could find. Getting that order backwards costs around forty percent more for exactly the same data. Expect one credit for a verified email and around ten for a direct mobile as the market rate. Verification, at a tenth of a credit, is the cheapest insurance in the whole stack.

What each tool is built for

Prospeo finds the mobile number and the work email behind a LinkedIn profile, and returns both in the same call. That makes it the tool you reach for when the input is a profile and the output you need is a reachable person, phone included. Icypeas finds and verifies emails, bills only what it finds, and counts an audience for free before you spend anything. That last property matters more than it sounds: it means you can size a market before a single credit leaves your account, which is the discipline I describe in counting a list before you pay for it.

What Icypeas publishes, and why the sticker price is not the decision

Icypeas publishes its grid openly, starting at 19 dollars a month plus VAT for 1,000 found emails on the Basic tier, with a Premium tier at 39 dollars a month plus VAT for 4,000 found emails, an Advanced tier at 89 dollars a month plus VAT for 10,000 found emails, and a Hypergrowth tier at 499 dollars a month plus VAT for 100,000 found emails. The real decision, though, is not the sticker price. It is what a credit buys on your market, and in what order you place each provider in your sequence. I walk through that ordering in waterfall enrichment, explained by what it costs, because the order is where the money is won or lost.

Billing on results versus billing on queries

Icypeas bills on found emails, which means a miss costs nothing on the invoice. Prospeo works on a credit balance, so the economics depend entirely on what a credit returns on your market. Neither model is better in the abstract. If your market is thin on data, result-based billing protects you; if your market is rich, a credit balance can go further per dollar. The way to know which side you are on is to run a sample and measure the hit rate yourself, then compute a real cost per usable contact as I set out in what a B2B data provider costs per contact.

How I would sequence them

For email-first workflows, Icypeas is the natural first call: verification is built in, and you pay only for what is found. For mobiles, Prospeo is the tool that returns the number alongside the email in one pass, which changes the calculus when phone coverage is the bottleneck. A row the first provider could not fill is exactly what the second one should be asked for, and the reasoning behind that sequencing is the subject of which provider calls first in a waterfall. If you are weighing these against a broader workspace, what I moved to after Clay covers the same trade from the orchestration side.

What to measure before you commit

Take a sample of your actual market, run it through whatever free access each provider offers, and record two things: how many rows came back usable, and what that implies per contact at the published rates. Icypeas's free audience count tells you how large the target even is before you spend. Then read the tool-level records: what a mobile really costs on Prospeo and what an email and a mobile really cost us on Airscale carry the run-level detail this page deliberately leaves out. And if the bottleneck turns out to be your filters rather than your data, targeting by resemblance when filters run out is the next lever.