FullEnrich vs Clay 2026
Short answer: pick FullEnrich if you want clean waterfall enrichment that finds emails and mobiles across 20+ sources, charges you only for the data it actually finds, and starts around $55/month. Pick Clay if enrichment is one step inside a bigger machine you want to program: tables, automation, Claygent AI research and 150+ providers, starting at $185/month with a real learning curve. Clay edges the overall (4.0 vs 3.9) on features and integrations; FullEnrich wins ease, value and pay-only-on-success.
The nuance most comparisons skip: this is not strictly either-or. FullEnrich plugs in as a provider inside Clay's waterfall, so a lot of teams run both rather than choosing. This page scores them head to head, runs the pricing math, and tells you when stacking beats picking.
Waterfall across 20+ sources for email and mobile. You pay only for what it finds.
Try FullEnrich free →Read the full FullEnrich review →Programmable GTM platform: 150+ providers, AI research, tables and automation. Powerful, pricey.
Try Clay for free →Read the full Clay review →Who wins for you
FullEnrich is live in minutes, finds emails and mobiles across 20+ sources, and only bills for found data from around $55/month. Clay's $185 entry and learning curve are hard to justify for pure contact finding.
Try FullEnrich free →Clay is the orchestration layer: tables, conditional logic, Claygent AI research, 150+ providers and CRM sync. Enrichment is just one column among many. The premium buys a whole engine.
Try Clay for free →Table-based isolation per client, 150+ providers and an API make Clay the central hub. You can still drop FullEnrich in as one of those providers.
Try Clay for free →If the job is take a list, find contacts, export, FullEnrich does it faster and cheaper without paying for Clay's automation layer you would not use.
Try FullEnrich free →FullEnrich vs Clay at a glance
Every cell below is grounded in each tool's pricing and product pages and our hands-on testing. They sit at different altitudes, so read the core model row first: one is a focused enrichment engine, the other a platform that happens to enrich.
| FullEnrich | Clay | Edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core modelDifferent altitudes, not pure substitutes | Focused waterfall enrichment, email and mobile | Programmable GTM platform, enrichment is one step | — |
| What it is | Take a list, find contacts across many sources, export | Tables, automation, AI research and enrichment in one workspace | — |
| Data sourcesClay has far more breadth to wire up | 20+ premium sources cascaded in one waterfall | 150+ providers you orchestrate yourself | Clay |
| Email and mobile findingFullEnrich does it out of the box | Built-in waterfall, ~80% find rate claimed, mobile included | You build the waterfall column by column across providers | FullEnrich |
| Pricing model | Pay-per-found credits, from ~$55/month (verify current price) | Account-wide credits, from $185/month (Launch) | FullEnrich |
| Free tierBoth test-only, not for real campaigns | 50 credits, no card required | 100 credits per month plus Chrome extension | — |
| Outreach and sequencingNeither replaces a real sending tool | None, enrichment only | Basic built-in Sequencer, weaker than dedicated senders | Clay |
| Learning curve | Minutes, bulk and API are straightforward | 5 to 6h to master tables, waterfalls and the credit model | FullEnrich |
| Integrations | HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive, Clay, n8n, Make, Zapier | 150+ data providers plus CRM and outreach connectors | Clay |
| APIFullEnrich exposes its API earlier and cheaper | Public API, documented at docs.fullenrich.com | HTTP API on Growth, full API on Enterprise | FullEnrich |
| Ideal user | SDRs, RevOps, agencies needing fast, cheap contact finding | Growth and RevOps teams building automated GTM workflows | — |
Prices checked June 2026 on fullenrich.com and clay.com pricing. FullEnrich bills credits per data point found, Clay bills account-wide credits across actions, so totals are not directly comparable. FullEnrich's ~$55 entry should be verified against the current price.
Criterion by criterion, head to head
The same five criteria we scored on each tool's review page. Tied scores still get a clear pick.
01 Round 1: from signup to a list of contacts.
FullEnrich takes this 4.0 to 3.5, and the gap is the whole point of the tool. Sign up, paste a list or upload a CSV, hit enrich, export. We had usable emails and a few mobile numbers in our first session with no manual setup. The interface is not the prettiest we have used and a few flows feel rough, but the path from cold start to a finished list is short. The Chrome LinkedIn extension that used to speed sourcing was sunset in June 2026, so bulk and API are now the main entry points.
Clay is a different animal. The table interface is familiar to anyone who lives in Airtable, and a simple enrichment ran in about 30 minutes for us. The wall is the waterfall logic plus the credit model: we burned roughly 1,000 credits in week one on badly structured columns before it clicked, and reviewers flag the same. One G2 user put it plainly, Clay can feel overwhelming at first because of how many features and workflows it offers. The payoff is real once you invest 5 to 6 hours, but it is an investment, not a quick start.
Choose FullEnrich if you want contacts today with zero configuration.
Choose Clay if you have a technical team and want a workspace you can program, not just an enrichment button.
02 Round 2: what you actually pay for what you get.
FullEnrich takes this 3.8 to 3.5, mostly on its pay-per-found model. You are charged only when the waterfall actually returns data: a work email costs 1 credit, a personal email 3, a mobile number 10. Pro lands around $55/month for 1,000 credits (verify the current price), and credits roll over, three months on monthly, twelve on annual. The honest catch is mobile: at 10 credits each, a phone-heavy month gets expensive fast, so FullEnrich is best when emails are the bulk of the work and mobiles are reserved for high-value targets.
Clay's score did not move. The platform is powerful, but $185/month for the Launch entry, with account-wide credits that vanish quickly when you stack providers or run large tables, is a hard sell for a team that only needs contact finding. Reviewers love what Clay does and still call the pricing expensive. Where Clay earns it is when enrichment is one part of a workflow that also researches, scores and routes leads automatically. If you are paying Clay only to find emails, you are overpaying for the orchestration you are not using.
Choose FullEnrich if you want to pay only for data you actually get and keep the bill predictable on emails.
Choose Clay if enrichment is one step in a workflow whose automation justifies the platform price.
03 Round 3: focused finder vs full platform.
Clay takes this 4.5 to 3.9 on raw breadth, and it is not close. FullEnrich is deliberately narrow and does its one job well: a waterfall across 20+ sources, enrichment from a LinkedIn URL, reverse email lookup, bulk and a public API. It has no database of its own, no AI research and no outreach. That focus is a feature for buyers who want a finder, not a suite.
Clay is a platform. The waterfall across 150+ providers, Claygent AI that researches a company website, pulls signals from news and writes a personalised opener, a formula builder with conditional logic, tables, folders and a basic Sequencer. It replaces several tools at once. The honest catches: signal refresh runs once a day so it is not real-time, mobile enrichment burns 8 to 15 credits per hit, and its Sequencer is weaker than dedicated senders. FullEnrich is the sharp scalpel; Clay is the workshop. If depth and automation are what you are buying, Clay wins this round outright.
Choose FullEnrich if you want one reliable finding engine without features you will not touch.
Choose Clay if AI research, conditional logic and a programmable workspace are the point.
04 Round 4: who answers when you are stuck.
This round is a 4.0 to 4.0 tie on score, and we give the edge to Clay on breadth. FullEnrich support is responsive and human, which matters for a smaller team: chat and email get answered, and because the product is simple there is less to get stuck on in the first place. For pure enrichment, most users will rarely need to open a ticket.
Clay invests harder in success because it has to, given the complexity. In-app chat is on every paid plan and answered us in 2 to 4 hours, once with a personalised Loom video walking through a formula. The 15,000-member Slack community is genuinely active, the founding team and even the CTO answer technical questions, and Clay University ships 700+ templates with video walkthroughs. Neither offers phone support outside enterprise, and Clay's weekend replies stretch to 12 to 24 hours. We hand Clay the round because its community and learning resources defuse the learning curve that FullEnrich, being simpler, never imposes.
Choose FullEnrich if a simple tool with responsive chat is all the support you need.
Choose Clay if you want chat on every plan plus a 15K community when a complex workflow breaks.
05 Round 5: clean connectors vs full orchestration.
Clay takes this 4.5 to 4.2 on orchestration depth, but FullEnrich is genuinely strong here for its size. FullEnrich syncs with HubSpot, Salesforce and Pipedrive, plugs into the no-code stack, Clay, n8n, Make and Zapier, and ships a documented public API. For a focused finder, that is a wide surface, and the API arrives earlier and cheaper than Clay's does.
Clay answers with 150+ native data providers, bidirectional CRM sync, connections to the major senders and a deep automation layer. Here is the nuance the stale comparisons miss: FullEnrich runs as a provider inside Clay. You can drop FullEnrich into a Clay waterfall column, which is exactly why many teams stop treating this as a choice and run both, FullEnrich as a high-find-rate source feeding Clay's orchestration. Clay wins breadth; FullEnrich wins zero-friction setup and an API you reach on day one.
Choose FullEnrich if you want clean CRM and no-code connectors plus an API without an enterprise plan.
Choose Clay if you need it to be the central hub wiring your whole GTM stack, with FullEnrich as one input.
The real cost, plan by plan
Two pricing models that do not map onto each other: FullEnrich bills credits only for data it finds, Clay bills account-wide credits across actions and enrichments. We list the plans, then note the credit costs that decide the math, assumptions stated.
| FullEnrich | Clay | Edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| FreeBoth are test-only, not for real campaigns | $0: 50 credits, no card required | $0: 100 credits per month, Chrome extension | — |
| Entry plan | Pro ~$55/month: 1,000 credits, pay-per-found (verify current price) | Launch $185/month: 2,500 Data Credits, 15,000 Actions, phone enrichment | FullEnrich |
| Higher planDifferent scope, Growth adds automation and CRM sync | Enterprise custom: large annual credit volume (~60K/year), SSO, account manager | Growth $495/month: 6,000 Data Credits, 40,000 Actions, CRM auto-sync, HTTP API | — |
| Credit costFullEnrich only charges when data is found | Work email 1, personal email 3, mobile 10, reverse email lookup 1 | Email waterfall ~4 to 8 credits, full enrichment ~13 to 24 | FullEnrich |
| Credit rollover | Unused credits roll over 3 months (monthly) or 12 months (annual) | Credits reset monthly on most plans, top-ups available | FullEnrich |
| Mobile economicsMobile is expensive on both, reserve it for high-value targets | 10 credits per mobile, premium but pay-only-on-success | 8 to 15 credits per mobile via providers, charged on the action | — |
| Solo, ~1,000 emails/monthFullEnrich is far cheaper for email-only finding at this volume | Pro ~$55 covers ~1,000 work-email credits, mobiles extra | Launch $185 with credits split across actions, fewer pure email finds | FullEnrich |
Prices checked June 2026. FullEnrich's exact Pro price should be verified against the current page; the unconfirmed lower tiers are not cited here. Clay's legacy Starter, Explorer and Pro plans still run for existing customers. Credit examples are illustrative, real cost depends on find rate and workflow.
Pick by scenario
Choose FullEnrich if…
- You want clean waterfall enrichment for email and mobile with no setup, live in minutes
- Predictable cost matters and you only want to pay for the data actually found
- Bulk CSV enrichment or a simple API call is the whole job, no automation layer needed
- Emails are the bulk of your work and you reserve the 10-credit mobiles for key targets
- You want one enrichment tool that also slots into Clay, n8n, Make or Zapier later
Choose Clay if…
- Enrichment is one step in a wider workflow you want to automate end to end
- You need Claygent AI research, conditional logic and 150+ providers in one workspace
- You are an agency or RevOps team needing table-based isolation per client
- You will use the orchestration, not just the find button, so the $185+ price earns out
- You want to run FullEnrich as a provider inside Clay's waterfall for higher coverage
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between FullEnrich and Clay?
FullEnrich is a focused waterfall enrichment tool: you give it a list, it cascades across 20+ sources to find work emails, personal emails and mobile numbers, and you export the result. Clay is a programmable GTM platform where enrichment is just one step. Clay gives you tables, conditional logic, Claygent AI research and 150+ providers you orchestrate yourself. FullEnrich does one job out of the box and charges only for data it finds; Clay builds a whole automated workflow but costs more and takes 5 to 6 hours to learn. If you just need contacts, FullEnrich. If you need an automation engine, Clay.Is FullEnrich or Clay cheaper?
FullEnrich is cheaper for pure contact finding. Its Pro plan lands around $55/month for 1,000 credits on a pay-per-found model, where a work email is 1 credit and you are only charged when data is found. Clay's entry Launch plan is $185/month with account-wide credits split across actions and enrichments, so fewer of those credits go to actual email finds. For a solo operator who mainly needs emails, FullEnrich is materially cheaper. Clay only becomes worth its price when you use the automation and research layers around enrichment, not enrichment alone. Verify FullEnrich's current Pro price, as it can change.Can you use FullEnrich inside Clay?
Yes, and this is the nuance most comparisons miss. FullEnrich is available as a provider inside Clay, so you can add it as an enrichment column or as a step in a Clay waterfall. That lets you keep Clay as the orchestration hub for tables, AI research and CRM sync while using FullEnrich's high find rate as one of the sources feeding it. Many teams stop treating this as an either-or choice for exactly this reason: FullEnrich finds the data, Clay routes, scores and acts on it. If you already run Clay, adding FullEnrich as a provider is often smarter than replacing either tool.Which is more accurate, FullEnrich or Clay?
Both rely on the same idea, a waterfall that tries multiple sources in sequence, so accuracy depends on the sources behind it more than the brand. FullEnrich claims around 80% find rate across its 20+ sources, which beats most single-vendor tools that land in the 40 to 60% range. Clay can reach similar or higher coverage because it can stack 150+ providers, including FullEnrich itself, but only if you configure the waterfall well, badly built columns waste credits and miss data. For out-of-the-box accuracy with no tuning, FullEnrich is the safer bet. For maximum coverage you are willing to engineer, Clay's breadth wins.Does FullEnrich have outreach or sequences?
No. FullEnrich is enrichment only, it finds and verifies contact data but does not send emails or run sequences. Clay has a basic built-in Sequencer, but it is weaker than dedicated senders and most teams do not rely on it for serious campaigns. Whichever tool you pick, you will pair it with a sending tool such as Instantly, Lemlist or Smartlead for actual outreach. The realistic stack is FullEnrich or Clay for finding and enriching contacts, then a dedicated sequencer for sending. Do not expect either tool to run your cold email campaigns by itself.Can FullEnrich and Clay find mobile phone numbers?
Yes, both can find mobile numbers, and both make it the expensive part. FullEnrich charges 10 credits per mobile against 1 for a work email, with a claimed find rate near 80%, so a phone-heavy month adds up quickly even on its pay-per-found model. Clay finds mobiles through providers like Lusha, Kaspr and others at roughly 8 to 15 credits per successful lookup, and find rates vary a lot by geography, stronger for US numbers than European ones. On both tools, the smart move is to reserve mobile enrichment for high-value targets where a call is worth the credits, and lead with emails for the bulk of a list.Are FullEnrich and Clay GDPR compliant?
Both can be used in a GDPR-compliant way, but compliance ultimately sits with you as the data controller. Clay is a processor that pulls from many third-party providers, each with its own policies, and offers DPAs for Enterprise. FullEnrich aggregates external sources too, and has drawn some privacy complaints from individuals whose data was found, which is a data-sourcing story rather than a product-quality one. With either tool you need a lawful basis such as legitimate interest, proper suppression and deletion handling, and care over which sources you enable. For EU-heavy prospecting, review each provider's stance and document your processing before scaling.Can you migrate from FullEnrich to Clay or the other way?
There is no one-click migration because they do different jobs, but moving between them is simple in practice since both work from lists. To go from FullEnrich to Clay, import your CSV into a Clay table and rebuild enrichment as columns. To go the other way, export a Clay table and run it through FullEnrich's bulk enrichment. The most common path is not migration at all but stacking: keep Clay for orchestration and add FullEnrich as a provider inside it, or keep FullEnrich for cheap bulk finding and reach for Clay only when a workflow needs automation. Pick migration only if you are clearly outgrowing or over-buying one of them.Which is better for a solo founder or freelancer?
FullEnrich, in most cases. A solo operator usually needs contacts fast and cheap, not a programmable platform. FullEnrich is live in minutes, charges only for data it finds from around $55/month, and has nothing to learn beyond upload and export. Clay's $185 entry, account-wide credits and 5 to 6 hour learning curve are hard to justify when you are not building automated workflows yet. The exception is a technical solo founder who genuinely wants AI research and automation from day one. Otherwise start with FullEnrich, then add Clay later if and when enrichment becomes one piece of a bigger system you want to automate.Which is better for an agency or RevOps team?
Clay, usually, with FullEnrich often living inside it. Agencies and RevOps teams need table-based isolation per client, conditional logic, AI research and CRM sync, which is exactly what Clay's platform provides and FullEnrich does not attempt. The catch is cost and complexity: budget for the $185 to $495 plans and the time to learn the system. Where FullEnrich fits is as a provider inside Clay's waterfall, giving you a high find rate on emails and mobiles while Clay handles orchestration. A lean agency that only does bulk enrichment for clients, with no automation, can still run FullEnrich alone and skip Clay's overhead entirely.
Test both, then decide
Free to start on either side. The fastest way to know is to run one real prospect list through each and compare find rate and cost.
Best for SDRs, RevOps and agencies who want fast, cheap waterfall enrichment and only pay for found data. Free 50 credits, then from ~$55/month.
Try FullEnrich free →Read the full FullEnrich review →Best for growth and RevOps teams building automated GTM workflows where enrichment is one step. Free plan, then $185+ account-wide.
Try Clay for free →Read the full Clay review →Affiliate links: if you sign up through them, you support our independent hands-on tests at no extra cost to you. We score both tools the same way and disclose the weak spots on each, including the ones we would otherwise recommend.
Get the next comparison in your inbox
Join 2,400+ makers who get our independent tool tests every week.