Adapt.io vs Lusha: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
Compare Adapt.io and Lusha side by side. See pricing, features, and integrations to choose the right data enrichment tool for your needs.
Adapt.io lists Starter at $49 a month for 500 email credits. Lusha lists Starter at $49.90 a month per seat for 4,800 credits a year, which is 400 a month. On annual rates the two land within a fraction of a cent per contact, so workflow rather than price decides.
Key takeaways
- Adapt.io's pricing page lists Starter at $49 a month for 500 email credits and Basic at $99 for 1,000 email plus 100 phone credits.
- Lusha's pricing page lists Starter at $49.90 a month per seat for 4,800 credits a year and Pro at $69.90 for 7,200.
- Lusha's annual rates are $37.45 for Starter, $48.95 for Pro and $259.95 for Premium, a discount of roughly a quarter.
- Lusha's ladder jumps from $69.90 to $399.90 a month per seat with nothing between, while Adapt.io runs $49, $99 and then Custom.
Reviewed and updated August 28, 2026
Adapt.io vs Lusha: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
These two land within a dollar of each other at the first paid rung. Adapt.io's Starter is $49 a month for 500 email credits. Lusha's Starter is $49.90 a month per seat for 4,800 credits a year, which is 400 a month. Similar money, similar volume, and two products that expect completely different behaviour from the person using them.
The Quick Answer
Adapt.io gives slightly more monthly volume at a marginally lower price, at 500 email credits for $49 a month against Lusha's 400 a month for $49.90 per seat. Lusha's advantages are its browser workflow, intent signals and unusually wide automation integrations. Choose Adapt.io for filter-driven list building. Choose Lusha for reps working accounts in a browser.
Understanding the Core Difference
Adapt.io is a B2B lead intelligence platform with a large contact database, Prospector Chrome extension, and data enrichment with 50+ attributes.
Lusha is a B2B contact database with browser extension for LinkedIn prospecting, CSV enrichment, and intent signals.
Adapt.io is built for someone assembling a list before outreach starts. Lusha is built for someone working accounts already in play, revealing contacts on LinkedIn and enriching a CRM record. The intent signal alerts on Lusha's feature list are the clearest evidence of that: they exist to tell a rep which account to work next, which is not a list building question.
Pricing Comparison
Free plan, 25 email credits
Free plan, 40 credits a month
Adapt.io Pricing
| Plan | Price | Email credits | Other credits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | 25 email credits | 25 enrichment credits, 25 contacts a day |
| Starter | $49/mo | 500 email credits | 500 enrichment credits, 50 contacts a day |
| Basic | $99/mo | 1,000 email credits | 100 phone credits, 1,000 enrichment credits |
| Custom | Talk to sales | Custom | Custom |
Phone credits appear only at Basic, so a team that needs mobile numbers starts at the third rung rather than the second. The page prices a yearly commitment 20 percent below monthly and opens with a 7-day free trial that asks for no credit card.
Source: Adapt.io Pricing
Lusha Pricing
| Plan | Billed monthly | Billed annually | Credits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free | 40 credits a month |
| Starter | $49.90/mo per seat | $37.45/mo per seat | 4,800 credits a year |
| Pro | $69.90/mo per seat | $48.95/mo per seat | 7,200 credits a year |
| Premium | $399.90/mo per seat | $259.95/mo per seat | 40,800 credits a year |
Note the jump between Pro and Premium. The middle of this ladder is priced for an individual rep and the top of it is priced for a team, with nothing in between, so a growing team crosses a wide gap in one step.
Source: Lusha Pricing
How these figures were checked
Adapt.io's tiers, credit allowances, daily contact ceilings, yearly discount and free trial terms were all grepped out of a dated snapshot of adapt.io/pricing taken for this comparison. Lusha's monthly and annual rates and its credit allowances were grepped out of a dated snapshot of lusha.com/pricing taken for this comparison.
Two habits sit behind those sentences and both are worth borrowing when you check a vendor price yourself. A figure belongs to a page rather than to a company, because vendors contradict themselves across their own surfaces, so the page is part of the fact. And a pricing page that renders a monthly and an annual state into the same document will hand a careless reader a rate no visitor is shown, which is why the billing basis is named beside every number above rather than left implied.
What the two cost at a realistic volume
Take an invented month at 500 verified contacts for one person. The volume is illustrative and both rates are published. Adapt.io's Starter plan covers it exactly at $49 a month with 500 email credits, just under ten cents a contact. Lusha's Starter carries 4,800 credits a year, which is 400 a month, so 500 needs Pro at $69.90 a month per seat with 7,200 a year, about fourteen cents a contact at the monthly rate. Billed annually Lusha's Pro drops to $48.95 a month per seat, which brings it to about ten cents and puts the two within a fraction of a cent of each other.
Reading the price ladders against each other
The annual figures are where this comparison actually resolves. Lusha's annual rates are $37.45 a month for Starter, $48.95 for Pro and $259.95 for Premium, a discount of roughly a quarter. Adapt.io prices a yearly commitment 20 percent below monthly. The structural difference is the gap in Lusha's ladder: Pro at $69.90 and Premium at $399.90 with nothing between, so a growing team faces one large step, where Adapt.io runs $49, $99 and then Custom.
Features Breakdown
- Business contacts across the database
- Company profiles
- Prospector Chrome extension
- Data enrichment with 50+ attributes
- Lead builder with advanced filters
- ABM list building
- and 4 more listed below
- Browser extension for LinkedIn
- CSV enrichment
- Bulk contact reveal
- Intent signal alerts
- Technology stack data
- Custom API
- and 3 more listed below
Adapt.io key features
- Business contacts across the database
- Company profiles
- Prospector Chrome extension
- Data enrichment with 50+ attributes
- Lead builder with advanced filters
- ABM list building
- 3,000+ tech sector classifications
- Saved searches
- CSV export
- API access
Lusha key features
- Browser extension for LinkedIn
- CSV enrichment
- Bulk contact reveal
- Intent signal alerts
- Technology stack data
- Custom API
- Team management
- CRM enrichment (Scale)
- SSO (Scale)
Lusha's list is account-working: intent signal alerts, technology stack data, bulk contact reveal, CSV enrichment, CRM enrichment and SSO on higher tiers. Adapt.io's is list-building: advanced filters, saved searches, ABM list building from uploaded domains, 3,000 plus tech sector classifications and API access. The ABM upload and the intent alerts are the two features most likely to decide this, and they point in opposite directions.
Integration Ecosystem
Adapt.io connects with: Salesforce, HubSpot, Zoho CRM, Marketo, Outreach, Zapier.
Lusha connects with: Gmail, Outlook, Salesforce, HubSpot, Outreach, Microsoft Dynamics 365, Pipedrive, SalesLoft, Zoho CRM, Zapier, Make, n8n.
Both tools integrate with: Salesforce, HubSpot, Zoho CRM, Outreach, Zapier.
Lusha's integration list is unusually wide on automation, reaching Zapier, Make and n8n alongside Gmail, Outlook, Microsoft Dynamics 365, Pipedrive and SalesLoft. Adapt.io reaches Marketo, which Lusha does not. Both cover Salesforce, HubSpot, Zoho CRM, Outreach and Zapier, so a standard stack is served either way and only a custom automation layer separates them.
Who Should Pick Which
Pick Adapt.io when lists come from criteria and you want the work to happen before outreach starts. The ABM upload, the saved searches and the sector taxonomy are the product, and the daily contact ceiling of 50 on Starter is the constraint to check.
Pick Lusha when reps work accounts in a browser and intent signals would change what they do next. That is a different motion from list building and the tool is priced per seat because it assumes several people doing it.
Pick Lusha when your enrichment is wired into custom automation. Reaching Make and n8n as well as Zapier is genuinely unusual for a contact data tool, and rebuilding those flows against a narrower integration list is more work than the price difference is worth.
Where Each One Sits in a Cold Outbound Stack
- Step 1Build the list
Decide who belongs on it at all. Adapt.io is a list builder you run before anyone is contacted.
- Step 2Resolve the contact
Turn a name into an address you can send to. Lusha is a per seat contact finder aimed at the individual rep.
- Step 3Verify before sending
Check the address separately from whoever supplied it, because a bounce costs sending reputation.
- Step 4Send one message
One message per campaign, no bumps and no thread replies, so each address gets a single attempt.
Both sit in the sourcing slot of a cold outbound stack and they fill it at different moments. Adapt.io produces the list a wave is built from. Lusha produces contacts one account at a time as reps work through a territory.
For the wave itself the downstream is identical. House practice is one message per campaign with no bumps and no thread replies, so every address gets one attempt and a bad one costs domain reputation rather than a follow-up. That makes a verification pass between enrichment and send worth its cost regardless of which tool supplied the row, and it is the step most often skipped when volume looks cheap. See email verification tools.
Switching Between Them
Neither tool holds workflow, so the mechanics are a CSV export and a CRM reconnection, and the five shared integrations mean the downstream survives in either direction.
The accounting is what needs care. Lusha quotes credits per year on a monthly plan, and Adapt.io quotes credits per month with a daily ceiling on top. Those two ledgers do not map onto each other cleanly, so convert both to contacts a month and check the daily cap against how you actually work before assuming the allowances are equivalent. Compare a full year on both rather than a single month.
Feature Comparison Summary
| Comparison | Adapt.io | Lusha |
|---|---|---|
| Entry rung | Free | Free |
| First paid rung | $49/mo | $49.90/mo |
| What that paid rung is | Starter, 500 email credits | Starter, per seat, billed monthly |
| Where it sits in a stack | A list builder you run before anyone is contacted | A per seat contact finder aimed at the individual rep |
Getting Started Checklist
- Convert both allowances to contacts a month, since one is quoted yearly and one monthly
- Check Adapt.io's daily contact ceiling against how you build lists
- Count seats, because Lusha prices per seat and Adapt.io does not
- Compare annual rates rather than mixing billing modes, since that is where they converge
- Decide whether intent signals would actually change a rep's behaviour
- Check whether Make or n8n is load bearing in your automation
Final Thoughts
Adapt.io is marginally cheaper per contact on monthly billing and the better fit for filter-driven list building. Lusha matches it almost exactly on annual rates and wins for reps working accounts in a browser, especially where intent signals or custom automation matter. Compare the two at annual rates and on contacts a month, because the headline figures make them look further apart than they are.
Related Reading
- Best Adapt.io Alternatives in 2026
- Best Lusha Alternatives in 2026
- Adapt.io vs Apollo.io: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
- Adapt.io vs ZoomInfo: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
- Apollo.io vs Lusha: Which B2B Data Enrichment Platform Fits Your Sales Stack?
If you would rather have this run for you, RevenueFlow books qualified meetings on a pay-per-meeting basis and publishes client results.
Pricing and features are taken from the vendors' own pages. Verify current terms with the vendor before relying on them.
Frequently asked questions.
Frequently asked questions- Which is cheaper per contact?
- On monthly billing Adapt.io is slightly cheaper, at 500 email credits for $49 against Lusha's 400 a month for $49.90 per seat. On annual billing they converge almost exactly: Lusha's Pro drops to $48.95 a month for 600 contacts a month, which lands within a fraction of a cent of Adapt.io's rate.
- Does Lusha charge per seat?
- Yes. Its published rates are per seat per month, so a team of three pays three times the listed figure. Adapt.io's tiers are priced per account with a daily contact ceiling rather than per seat, which is the structural difference to check before comparing headline prices across a team of any size.
- What are Lusha intent signals for?
- Intent signal alerts appear on Lusha's feature list and are designed to tell a rep which account to work next based on observed buying behaviour. That is an account-working capability rather than a list building one, which is why it points at a different use case from Adapt.io's filters, saved searches and ABM upload.
- Which integrates with automation tools?
- Lusha reaches Zapier, Make and n8n, which is unusually wide for a contact data tool and matters if enrichment is wired into custom workflows. Adapt.io reaches Zapier and adds Marketo, which Lusha does not. Both cover Salesforce, HubSpot, Zoho CRM and Outreach, so a standard sales stack is served either way.
About the author.
Tim Carden is CMO / CTO at RevenueFlow, which builds and operates outbound revenue engines for B2B companies. Studied at McGill University.
Tim Carden · CMO / CTO
Connect on LinkedIn →Explore more.
Ready to scale your outreach?
We build GTM engines that book real meetings. See the receipts.
Related articles.
Adapt.io vs RocketReach: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
Compare Adapt.io and RocketReach side by side. See pricing, features, and integrations to choose the right data enrichment tool for your needs.
Datanyze vs Lead411: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
Compare Datanyze and Lead411 side by side. See pricing, features, and integrations to choose the right data enrichment tool for your needs.
Datanyze vs UpLead: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
Compare Datanyze and UpLead side by side. See pricing, features, and integrations to choose the right data enrichment tool for your needs.
Clearbit vs Lead411: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
Compare Clearbit and Lead411 side by side. See pricing, features, and integrations to choose the right data enrichment tool for your needs.
Lead411 vs ZoomInfo: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
Compare Lead411 and ZoomInfo side by side. See pricing, features, and integrations to choose the right data enrichment tool for your needs.
Clay vs Seamless.AI: Data Enrichment Tool Comparison
Compare Clay and Seamless.AI side by side. See pricing, features, and integrations to choose the right data enrichment tool for your needs.