FullEnrich vs LeadSonar: Enrichment Scope Compared 2026

Short answer: comparing what each vendor actually publishes, LeadSonar is the strongest pick for outbound teams that want accurate B2B data without a separate list source, and here is where FullEnrich beats it. FullEnrich is the closest architectural peer, since both are waterfall enrichment engines that bill only for the contacts they find.

• LeadSonar [Best for teams that need to build the list and enrich it in the same workspace]
• FullEnrich [Best for teams whose list already exists and who want one narrow, focused enrichment layer over it]

This page decides on scope: what each product can do when you have no list yet.

On a 103,000-lead production test, more than 91% of the leads LeadSonar scored came back above mid-tier quality (B grade or better) before any human review. Based on 2026 LeadSonar production data.

Sources and method are at the end of this page.

The comparison at a glance

| Dimension | LeadSonar | FullEnrich | |---|---|---| | Starting price | $29/mo (Starter) | $29/mo Pro, 500 credits | | Top published tier | $499/mo (Scale) | $3,500/mo for 100,000 credits | | Annual discount | 16% off list | About 10% cheaper than monthly | | Seats | Included in the workspace plan | Unlimited users, no per-seat fee | | Credit rollover | Not published on the plan page | 3 months on monthly, 12 months on annual | | Free tier | No card, 1,000 leads, 7 days | Free trial of 50 credits | | Billing model | Pay only when data is found; misses are free | Pay only for contacts found; misses free, per the vendor's published promise | | Credit unit | Dual pools; CSV billed per filled cell | Weighted credits: work email 1, personal 3, mobile 10 | | Lead database to prospect from | 120M+ B2B contacts (plus 45M+ B2C), searchable and filterable | Search included on every plan; no database size published | | Email finding | Multi-source waterfall across 18-20 sources, roughly 85% resolved | Waterfall across a published claim of 25+ sources | | Published accuracy data | 99.98% valid MX and 0.55% hard bounce on 37,040 mailed records; 94.6% trailing-30-day deliverability | +80% find rate claimed, no sample size, method or date | | AI lead scoring | A/B/C/D grade + 0-100 score + written reason | Not published | | Natural-language search and AI openers | Sonya on every plan; role-aware subject lines inline | Not published | | Best for | Teams that start from zero list | Teams that start from a finished list |

All competitor figures verified 20 July 2026 from each vendor's own pricing page. Where a vendor publishes nothing, the cell says so.

Pricing snapshot

| Vendor | Tier | Price | Billing unit | Captured from | |---|---|---|---|---| | LeadSonar | Free Trial | $0, 7 days, no card | 1,000 leads | leadsonar.io published plans | | LeadSonar | Starter | $29/mo | Workspace, a single credit pool | leadsonar.io published plans | | LeadSonar | Growth / Pro | $79 / $199 per mo ($66 / ) | Workspace, a single credit pool | leadsonar.io published plans | | LeadSonar | Scale | $499/mo | Workspace, a single credit pool | leadsonar.io published plans | | FullEnrich | Free trial | 50 credits | Credits | fullenrich.com/pricing | | FullEnrich | Pro (entry) | $29/mo for 500 credits | Weighted credits: work email 1, personal email 3, mobile 10, failed lookup 0 | fullenrich.com/pricing | | FullEnrich | Pro | $42.75/mo for 750 credits | Weighted credits | fullenrich.com/pricing | | FullEnrich | Pro | $55/mo for 1,000 credits ($0.055 per credit) | Weighted credits | fullenrich.com/pricing | | FullEnrich | Volume | Up to $3,500/mo for 100,000 credits | Weighted credits | fullenrich.com/pricing | | FullEnrich | Annual billing | About 10% cheaper than monthly | Weighted credits | fullenrich.com/pricing |

All competitor figures verified 20 July 2026 from each vendor's own pricing page. Where a vendor publishes nothing, the cell says so.

One note on the FullEnrich rows: every FullEnrich plan includes unlimited users with no per-seat fee, and unused credits roll over for 3 months on monthly billing and 12 months on annual.

The entry price is the same on both sides. FullEnrich Pro starts at $29 per month and LeadSonar Starter costs $29 per month, so there is no price win to claim in either direction at the door. What differs is what the $29 buys: 500 FullEnrich waterfall enrichment lookups against 50,000 LeadSonar lead credits plus 10,000 enrichment credits. Those are not interchangeable units. A LeadSonar lead credit reveals a contact from a database you searched; a FullEnrich credit runs a waterfall lookup on a contact you already had. Compare them only if you also price whatever supplies the list on the FullEnrich side.

LeadSonar at a glance

LeadSonar runs the same enrichment architecture and wraps three more layers around it.

The waterfall cascades a contact through 18 to 20 sources arranged in three tiers and stops on the first source that returns a result. Roughly 85% of contacts resolve somewhere across that cascade, and results that no source resolves are marked not found and are never billed. Measured throughput on a production 5,000-record run was 23.5 enriched profiles per second, with average single-lead latency around 2 seconds end to end.

The first extra layer is a database: a 120M+ B2B contact database (plus 45M+ B2C), with each record resolved at the moment you reveal it through the waterfall rather than sitting pre-fetched. You can search and filter it by job title, persona, company, city, state, country, headcount bucket, industry, tech stack, funding stage, revenue and hiring activity. Searching and filtering cost nothing. A credit is spent when you reveal a contact.

The second layer is scoring with reasons attached. Every lead returns an A/B/C/D grade, a 0 to 100 fit score, a high, medium or low fit label and a written explanation, plus buyer-persona and company-type context. Across the 103,000-contact run the engine produced 22,772 distinct company-type strings, with no single company type exceeding 1.8% of the corpus.

The third layer is generation: role-aware subject lines and openers written inline with enrichment, plus AI company summaries. On the 37,040-record file, a custom subject line, opener, two-liner and PS line were populated on 100% of records. Sonya, the natural-language agent, sits over all of it on every plan including the free trial: you type "find 20 CTOs at SaaS companies in London with 50 to 200 employees" and it runs search, enrich, score and export.

LeadSonar sustains 23.5 enriched profiles per second and resolves roughly 85% of contacts across its 18-20 source cascade, charging only for the contacts it finds. Based on 2026 LeadSonar production data.

FullEnrich at a glance

FullEnrich is a pure-play waterfall enrichment tool. You bring contacts, typically a first name, a last name and a company domain, and it queries a chain of data sources for the missing email or phone number, stopping when a source returns one.

On its own site the vendor publishes a claim of 25+ data sources, a free trial of 50 credits, and a billing promise that a failed lookup costs nothing. The credit model is weighted by what the lookup returns: a work email costs 1 credit, a personal email 3, and a mobile number 10. That weighting is honest engineering, since mobile numbers genuinely cost more to source and a vendor pricing them identically is averaging the difference into your bill somewhere else.

The product leads with enrichment and its interface reflects that. FullEnrich does list search on every plan and charges 0.25 credits for a person and company profile, so a lookup surface exists, but it publishes no size for a searchable prospecting database, no ICP grading layer, and no natural-language query surface. For a RevOps team that receives lists from marketing or from a client, that narrow focus is a feature.

FullEnrich publishes a claim of 25+ data sources and a billing promise that a failed lookup is free, on its own site, checked July 20, 2026.

Scope compared: what happens when you have no list

This is the axis the page decides on, and it is the only axis where these two products genuinely diverge.

FullEnrich enriches contacts you already have, and the vendor's own material describes it the same way. It is a strong design for a specific state of the world: the list exists, the names and domains are known, and the missing piece is contact data.

Start a quarter earlier and the picture changes. A new territory, a new client or a new ICP hypothesis begins with no rows at all. FullEnrich does include search on every plan, so this is a question of degree rather than of absence, but it publishes no size for that search surface and its own product description leads with enrichment. Sourcing the list is therefore the step you have to plan for separately, and that prerequisite is invisible on a pricing page and expensive in practice, because it is usually solved with a second subscription or with an SDR's afternoon.

LeadSonar collapses that sequence into one workspace: filter a 120M+ B2B database to the segment, reveal the contacts, run them through the same class of waterfall, grade, write the opener, export to CSV or push to HubSpot, Salesforce, Instantly or Smartlead.

Here is the arithmetic at a stated volume, normalized to the entry paid tier on both sides. Both entry tiers cost $29 per month, so the price is not the variable; what each $29 covers is.

Take an SDR building 2,000 net-new contacts a month in a segment where they hold no existing list. On LeadSonar Starter at $29 per month, the reveals consume 2,000 of the tier's 50,000 monthly lead credits, and scoring all 2,000 plus a subject line each consumes 4,000 of the 10,000 enrichment credits. The month fits inside the entry tier with room left, and no separate list source is required.

On a pure enrichment tool, those 2,000 contacts first have to come from somewhere. FullEnrich's entry Pro tier is $29 per month for 500 credits, and 2,000 work-email lookups at 1 credit each need 2,000 credits, so this volume sits above the entry tier and lands near the $55 per month, 1,000-credit rate card extended out at $0.055 per credit. That cost then sits on top of whatever the list source costs. The real variable is how many line items the motion requires rather than the entry price, which is the same $29 on both sides.

On a 103,000-row production file, LeadSonar completed all 103,000 records with zero pipeline errors, and 100% of contacts carried a deliverable email on a custom company domain with 0% on free consumer providers. Based on 2026 LeadSonar production data.

Billing model: where these two agree

Most comparison pages in this category would turn billing into the wedge. That would be dishonest here.

FullEnrich publishes a promise that a failed lookup is free. LeadSonar bills only for the contacts the waterfall finds and never charges for a contact that no source resolved. Those are the same structural commitment expressed in different words, and any page presenting pay-per-result as a LeadSonar invention while comparing against FullEnrich has not read the competitor's site.

The genuine difference sits one level down, in the unit of charge. FullEnrich weights credits by the data type returned: 1 for a work email, 3 for a personal email, 10 for a mobile and 0 for a failed lookup, as published July 20, 2026. LeadSonar runs two balances, lead credits for reveals and enrichment credits for enrichment and AI actions, with CSV work billed per filled cell. Which is cheaper for you depends on your mobile-to-email ratio and on whether you need the reveal step at all.

What each vendor publishes about accuracy

There is a distinction the whole category dodges. A syntactically valid email address and one that actually delivered are different things, and almost every accuracy claim in this market quietly measures the first while implying the second.

LeadSonar measured both on the same dataset. In the 37,040-record US outbound sample, 99.98% of contacts carried a valid MX record, with only 6 records out of 37,040 lacking one. Those addresses were then actually mailed, and 0.55% produced a hard bounce, 204 rows, dominated by Google's 550-5.1.1 NoSuchUser and 550-5.2.1 DisabledUser responses. That second number is the one nobody publishes. Based on 2026 LeadSonar production data.

Alongside it, 95.2% of contacts in that file held founder, C-suite or VP-level-and-above titles. We are equally explicit about what we did not measure: four columns in that export were empty or constant and were excluded as unusable.

FullEnrich publishes a headline find rate of +80%, a verification promise, and a source count, and it states that roughly 30% of raw vendor data is removed by verification before a user sees it. Those are real published claims about how the product performs. What none of them carries is a sample size, a method or a date, so there is no way to check the find rate against a dataset the way the numbers above can be checked. That is a statement about their published material, verifiable in one click, and it says nothing about how accurate their data actually is.

One LeadSonar figure needs the same discipline: the number that describes what actually lands is the measured 94.6% average deliverability over a trailing 30 days, and that is the figure to weigh.

Of 37,040 outbound contacts, 99.98% carried a valid MX record and 0.55% hard-bounced when the list was actually mailed. Based on 2026 LeadSonar production data.

Where FullEnrich wins

Three places, and they are real.

Published source count. FullEnrich claims 25+ data sources, checked July 20, 2026. LeadSonar publishes 18 to 20. On the raw count they are ahead, and counting differently would not make the gap disappear. The number that governs your outcome is the share of your list that resolves, which for LeadSonar is roughly 85% across the full cascade. Ask any vendor, including us, for a resolve rate before you ask for a source count.

Simplicity. For a team that only needs enrichment on an existing list, FullEnrich is the narrower and simpler tool. There is no database to learn, no scoring layer to configure, no ICP definition to write. If your workflow is genuinely one step, buying a five-step platform is overhead.

A billing promise that matches ours. On the axis most of this category gets wrong, FullEnrich is on the right side of it.

All three strengths hold for teams whose lists already exist. None of them help on the day the list does not.

Choose FullEnrich if...

Choose FullEnrich if your lists always arrive from somewhere else and enrichment is the only step you need. If marketing hands you MQLs, if your CRM already holds the accounts, or if a client sends you the target list, then the discovery layer, the ICP grading and the natural-language search in LeadSonar are surfaces you will pay attention to and never use.

Choose FullEnrich if raw published source count is the criterion you have committed to. They publish 25+, we publish 18 to 20, and if that is the number your evaluation scores on, the decision is already made.

If your list is already built and stays built, the honest recommendation is the narrower tool.

Which one fits you

LeadSonar is focused lead intelligence: find, enrich and score, then pair it with any sender you already use.

Best for: Founders and SDRs entering a segment where they hold no existing contacts, since the discovery step and the enrichment step live in the same workspace and the entry tier starts at $29 per month.

Best for: RevOps teams whose lists arrive from marketing or a CRM export, in which case a pure enrichment layer such as FullEnrich covers the whole job with less surface area.

Best for: Email-first outbound motions, where the 0.55% measured hard-bounce rate on 37,040 mailed records is the number that governs whether the sequence survives its first week.

Best for: Phone-first motions, where you should compare the weighted credit cost of a mobile lookup against LeadSonar's independent phone cascade before committing.

Best for: Teams targeting founder and C-suite seniority, given that 95.2% of contacts in the 37,040-record sample held founder, C-suite or VP-level-and-above titles.

Best for: Agencies running outbound for several clients, since every new client starts from an empty list and saved lists keep client segments separate in one workspace.

Best for: US-heavy target markets, with EU coverage worth validating against your own sample on either tool first.

Where LeadSonar Fits

Hold any vendor in this category to one standard: make them show a number with a denominator, a date and a method attached. A source count is a specification. A hard-bounce rate measured on mail that was actually sent is proof.

Ours is on the record. On 37,040 records that were enriched and then mailed, 99.98% carried a valid MX record and 0.55% hard-bounced, and across 103,000 scored contacts, over 91% graded B-or-better with a written reason attached to every grade.

If your team is choosing between a focused enrichment layer and a workspace that also builds the list, the fastest way to settle it is to run your own sample. The LeadSonar free trial runs 7 days with no card and includes 1,000 leads, enough to reveal a real segment, enrich it, score it and check the bounce rate against your own ESP.

FAQ

Is FullEnrich worth it in 2026? For a team that still has to find its contacts, LeadSonar is usually the better start: one workspace searches a 120M+ B2B database, then enriches and scores, so there is no separate list source to buy. FullEnrich earns its place once the list already exists and enrichment is the only step left, where its 25+ source waterfall and pay-only-for-what-it-finds billing do that one job cleanly. If you are still building the list, FullEnrich has little to enrich yet.

Does FullEnrich charge for failed lookups? FullEnrich publishes a promise that you pay only for contacts it finds. LeadSonar uses the same structural model: a contact that no source resolves is marked not found and is never billed. On this axis the two products agree, and neither should be sold as an innovation over the other.

How much does FullEnrich cost per month? FullEnrich's pricing page at fullenrich.com/pricing, captured July 20, 2026, puts the entry Pro tier at $29 per month for 500 credits, $42.75 for 750 credits and $55 for 1,000 credits, which works out to $0.055 per credit. Volume tiers scale up to $3,500 per month for 100,000 credits, annual billing is about 10% cheaper, every plan includes unlimited users with no per-seat fee, and unused credits roll over 3 months on monthly billing or 12 months on annual. Credits are weighted by result: a work email costs 1, a personal email 3, a mobile 10 and a failed lookup 0. LeadSonar Starter is also $29 per month, so the two entry prices are identical; they differ in scope rather than at the door.

What is the best FullEnrich alternative for agencies? Agencies need list building and enrichment in the same workspace, because every new client starts with no list. LeadSonar covers both: a 120M+ B2B contact database (plus 45M+ B2C) with saved lists per client, plus the waterfall for lists a client hands over. On a 103,000-lead test, more than 91% of the leads LeadSonar scored came back above mid-tier quality (B grade or better). Based on 2026 LeadSonar production data.

Does FullEnrich have a lead database? Partly. FullEnrich lists search among the features included on every plan, and it charges 0.25 credits for a person and company profile, so a lookup surface exists. What it calls itself, in its own words, is a B2B contact enrichment platform, and it publishes no size for a searchable prospecting database. LeadSonar publishes a 120M+ B2B contact database (plus 45M+ B2C) with filters for title, industry, headcount, location, tech stack and funding stage, and search costs nothing until you reveal a contact. If a published database size matters to your evaluation, that is the difference to check.

How many contacts does LeadSonar have? LeadSonar's database holds 120M+ B2B contacts plus 45M+ B2C, searchable and filterable by title, industry, headcount, location, tech stack and funding stage before you spend anything. You pay only when you reveal a contact, and a lookup that no source resolves is a miss and is not charged. FullEnrich includes search on every plan and charges 0.25 credits for a person and company profile, but publishes no size for that search surface.

How accurate are B2B email finders? We mailed a real 37,040-contact list and only 0.55% hard-bounced. That is measured 2026 production data with the sample size stated. FullEnrich publishes a +80% find rate with no sample size, method or date, so there is no dataset to check it against.

Does LeadSonar do ICP scoring? Yes. Every LeadSonar lead returns an A/B/C/D grade, a 0 to 100 fit score, a fit label and a written reason, plus buyer-persona and company-type context. Across a 103,000-contact run the engine produced 22,772 distinct company-type descriptions with none exceeding 1.8% of the corpus. FullEnrich does not currently publish an ICP scoring feature.

Does LeadSonar have a free trial? LeadSonar's free trial runs 7 days with no card and includes 1,000 leads, with Sonya natural-language search available on it. FullEnrich publishes a free trial of 50 credits.

Methodology

FullEnrich sources. fullenrich.com and fullenrich.com/pricing, captured July 20, 2026. Every FullEnrich fact on this page comes from those pages and nowhere else: no review sites, no G2, no Capterra, no Reddit threads, no listicles. Plan prices, volume tiers, the annual discount, seat policy, credit rollover windows, credit weights, free-trial size, source-count claim, the +80% find rate, the search feature and its 0.25-credit profile charge, and the billing promise recorded here are the vendor's own published statements captured on that date. Where the vendor's own material does not state something, the cell reads that it is not published rather than carrying an estimate.

LeadSonar sources. Two anonymized production datasets, both cited with their denominators throughout. Sample one: 103,000 B2B contacts scored end to end, reporting ICP grade distribution (40.6% A, 50.8% B, over 91% B-or-better), score distribution, company-type cardinality and pipeline error count. Sample two: 37,040 US outbound records, enriched and then actually mailed, reporting MX validity, hard-bounce rate, title seniority and personalization fill. Throughput comes from a production 5,000-record bulk run. Plan pricing is LeadSonar's published plan set as of July 20, 2026: the month-to-month figures ($29 Starter, $79 Growth, $199 Pro, $499 Scale) are published directly on leadsonar.io.

Limitations. Both LeadSonar samples come from customer workloads and skew toward US B2B software, advertising and IT-services targets, so results on a different geography or vertical will differ. LeadSonar has never benchmarked FullEnrich's data, so this page publishes zero competitor accuracy numbers and states plainly what each vendor publishes about itself as of July 2026.

Further reading: what B2B contact data accuracy measures, building an outbound list from scratch, cleaning a B2B email list.

External references: fullenrich.com/pricing (captured 2026-07-20), fullenrich.com, RFC 5321, RFC 1035.

Last updated: July 2026 (Q3 2026).

Nikita Stoletov is CTO at LeadSonar, where he leads lead-intelligence and waterfall-enrichment engineering. He works on provider cascade design, deliverability verification and explainable ICP scoring at production throughput. More at leadsonar.io/authors/nikita-stoletov.