FullEnrich Pricing: You Pay Only for Found Data

Almost every enrichment vendor bills for the lookup. FullEnrich bills for the result, and publishes a machine-readable document saying so, which makes it one of the few pages in this category a buyer can price without a call.

The consequence of that model runs deeper than a headline rate. When a miss is free, the number that decides your bill stops being how many rows you send and becomes how many of them resolve, which is a number no vendor can promise and every vendor is happy to average.

The meter is the data point, not the lookup

As published on FullEnrich's pricing page and its machine-readable twin on 2 September 2026, credits are spent only when data is found and passes verification. A lookup that returns nothing costs nothing. A landline returned instead of a mobile number costs nothing.

The published credit costs per data point are the part to internalise, because they are not uniform.

A verified work email is 1 credit. A personal email is 3. A mobile phone number is 10. A reverse email lookup, meaning an email in and a full person and company profile out, is 1. A person and company profile on its own is 0.25, and it is free when bundled with any enrichment. A failed lookup is 0.

A mobile number therefore costs ten times a work email on the same account, out of one shared pool. Any comparison of this vendor against a per-lookup competitor collapses unless the mix is specified first, because the same thousand rows can consume a thousand credits or eleven thousand depending on what you asked for.

Cheap per rowOne credit or less

• Verified work email, 1 credit
• Reverse email lookup, 1 credit
• Person and company profile alone, 0.25
• Same profile bundled with enrichment, free
• Failed lookup, free

Several creditsThe mix changes the bill

• Personal email, 3 credits
• Any credit can be spent on any data type
• No separate email and phone quotas
• Landline returned instead of mobile, free

The expensive oneTen times a work email

• Mobile phone number, 10 credits
• Checked for landline status
• Checked for out of service status
• Owner name match in the US and Canada

The two ladders, and the unit that changes between them

The vendor publishes eleven volume bands on monthly billing and eleven on annual, and the two count credits on different clocks. Monthly bands are quoted as credits per month. Annual bands are quoted as credits per year, delivered upfront.

Billing clocks divide the whole category, and LeadMagic's two published per credit rates differ only by the clock behind them, which makes either one misleading in a comparison.

On monthly billing the ladder runs from 500 credits a month at $29, through 1,000 at $55, 5,000 at $255 and 10,000 at $499, up to 100,000 credits a month at $3,500, with anything above that quoted. The vendor's own per credit column runs from about $0.058 at the bottom band to about $0.035 at the top.

On annual billing the ladder runs from 6,000 credits a year at $26 a month, or $312 a year, through 24,000 at $94 a month, 120,000 at $454 a month and 600,000 at $1,769 a month, up to 1,200,000 credits a year at $3,150 a month, or $37,800 a year. The published per credit column there runs from about $0.052 down to about $0.032. The page describes annual billing as roughly ten percent cheaper than monthly.

Two things follow that a headline rate does not show.

The first is that the annual entry band is not the monthly entry band multiplied by twelve. Monthly 500 a month annualises to 6,000, which matches the annual entry band, but the annual rate at that volume is $26 a month against $29, so the discount is real and small at the bottom and much larger at the top of the ladder.

The second is the rollover rule, which is published and which most credit vendors do not offer. Unused credits roll over three months on monthly plans and twelve months on annual ones. On an annual plan with all credits delivered upfront, that effectively means the year's allowance is available from day one and survives to the end of the term, which changes how a seasonal workload should be sized.

Unlimited users is a pricing decision, not a feature

The page states that every plan includes unlimited users, that pricing never scales per seat, and that there is no platform fee on any plan, including the free trial.

That is worth separating from the marketing register it arrives in, because it changes which competitor comparison is valid. A per-seat vendor and a per-credit vendor cannot be compared on a headline figure at all: one bill moves with headcount and the other with volume. A team of three running heavy volume and a team of thirty running light volume will rank the same two vendors in opposite orders, and both will be right.

The corresponding risk is the one every shared pool carries. One pool, no per-user allocation, and a mobile number costing ten times an email means a single badly configured run can spend a month's budget. The vendor publishes per user credit limits, per user credit monitoring and low credit alerts as Pro features, which is the control that makes the shared pool safe rather than a feature to skip past.

1. Step 1Fix the mix

   Decide which data points you actually need per row: work email, personal email, mobile, or a profile. The credit cost differs by an order of magnitude between them.

2. Step 2Apply your own find rate

   Only found data spends credits, so the estimate is rows multiplied by your resolution rate, not by row count. Use your own measured rate, not a published average.

3. Step 3Pick the band above your estimate

   Bands are stepped rather than metered, so the useful question is which band your monthly total lands in and how much headroom the next one buys.

4. Step 4Check the billing clock

   Monthly bands count credits per month, annual bands count credits per year delivered upfront with a twelve month rollover. Size against the right clock.

What the vendor claims about quality, and how to read it

Three published claims sit behind the pay per result model, and each is checkable in a different way.

The vendor states that the waterfall runs across more than 25 data sources, that the average find rate for emails is about 80 percent and varies by region and seniority, and that roughly 30 percent of raw data is removed by verification before it reaches the user.

That last figure is the interesting one. A vendor telling you it discards nearly a third of what its sources return is describing its own verification as aggressive, and under a pay per result meter that discipline costs the vendor rather than the buyer. The incentive is aligned in a way that a per lookup meter's is not.

The find rate figure is an average across a customer base that is not yours, which is the same caveat that applies to every published accuracy number in this category. It is a reasonable planning input and a poor commitment. The only version of that number worth budgeting against is one measured on your own rows, and email finder tools sets out the bake-off that produces it: same rows, same day, one neutral verifier, scored on cost per correct address rather than hit rate.

The verification steps are published in detail. Emails pass syntax, SMTP and a catch-all deep check, with the vendor stating that 80 percent of catch-all domains are deep checked, and carry a confidence score. Phones are checked for landline status, out of service status and owner name match in the United States and Canada. Accept-all domains remain the honest limit of any such process, because a server that accepts mail to every address cannot evidence that a specific mailbox exists, and email verification tools covers what each result bucket does and does not prove.

Where a waterfall vendor sits in an ordered stack

FullEnrich sells a waterfall as a product, which is a different purchase from building one.

The arithmetic that orders any enrichment stack is unchanged by who assembles it: verification costs a small fraction of a paid lookup, so cheap resolution runs first and paid providers only ever see what the cheaper stage could not resolve. Waterfall enrichment works through the ordering and the billing details that change it.

What a bought waterfall buys is the absence of a second decision. One contract, one meter, one integration, and somebody else deciding which underlying source runs in which order. What it costs is the margin on that convenience and the loss of visibility into which source resolved which row, which matters when a segment goes thin and you want to know why.

For teams wiring this into a pipeline rather than a spreadsheet, the questions that decide the integration are rate limits, credit accounting and caching rather than coverage percentages, and data enrichment APIs covers the two separate limit systems that can stop a run.

The machine-readable page is the finding

One detail on this vendor is worth recording separately from its prices, because it is rare and it is spreading.

FullEnrich serves a plain markdown twin of its pricing page, labelled in its own text as a canonical machine-readable pricing summary written to help agents answer pricing questions accurately, with a JSON block carrying the full band tables, a currency field and its own last updated date. The document also states that if its values conflict with the rendered page, the rendered page is the source of truth.

That matters practically. The rendered pricing page renders its plan price through a digit animation that a text extraction reads as a string of separate numerals, so a scraper reading the page reports a figure no visitor sees. The markdown twin resolves it, and the two agreed on the per credit rate at the thousand credit band when both were read on 2 September 2026.

Client rendered prices break the same way elsewhere, and Crunchbase renders its rates in the browser, which is why the third party figures quoted for it disagree so consistently.

For anyone building a vendor comparison, the lesson generalises: try appending a markdown path to a pricing URL before scraping the rendered page, because a growing number of vendors publish one and it is cheaper and less ambiguous than anything a text extractor produces.

What to take away

FullEnrich prices enrichment in credits and spends them only on data found and verified, with a work email at 1 credit, a personal email at 3 and a mobile number at 10 from one shared pool. Eleven monthly bands run from 500 credits at $29 a month to 100,000 at $3,500, and eleven annual bands from 6,000 credits a year at $26 a month to 1,200,000 at $3,150 a month. Unused credits roll over three months on monthly plans and twelve on annual ones, and every plan carries unlimited users.

Size the plan against your own mix and your own find rate rather than against a row count, because a mobile heavy workload costs an order of magnitude more per row than an email only one on the same account.

If the constraint is the supply of qualified conversations rather than the supply of records, see what a first campaign produces on your own market, against a qualification standard agreed in writing before launch.

Plan bands, credit costs and verification claims above were read from FullEnrich's own pricing page and its machine-readable twin on 2 September 2026. The twin's embedded pricing object carries its own last updated date of 7 July 2026. Verify current terms with the vendor before relying on them.