Apollo.io vs Cognism (2026)
The decision is whether you need to see the price before you talk to anyone, or need the data held and screened the way a European procurement team expects. Apollo publishes every tier with real numbers, from a usable free plan to one hundred and nineteen dollars a user a month billed annually, hosts with United States providers only and says so in its processing addendum, and is a registered data broker in four named states. Cognism, from London, states that data is generally kept inside the European Economic Area and screens telephone numbers against preference registers in twelve named jurisdictions before delivery. Both build part of the database from their own users' contacts, and this is where they separate most. Apollo names the route, a contributor network of more than two million people, and the two product features that capture it. Cognism lists community sourced data first among its sources and describes neither the mechanism nor the consent behind it. Cognism publishes no price at all. Apollo carries a D on sending discipline.
- You want to know the price before you talk to anyone. Apollo publishes five tiers with real numbers and units, a free plan with full database access and two active sequences, and per seat rates of forty nine, seventy nine and one hundred and nineteen dollars a month billed annually, which the GTM Tech Index uses as the benchmark for commercial transparency.
- You want the source of each record named. Apollo names three routes, a contributor network of more than two million people, publicly available sources and purchased lists, and names Email Finder and Open Tracker as the features that turn a connected mailbox into shared inventory, so a buyer can see the trade before accepting it.
- Sequencing and dialing belong in the same subscription as the data. Apollo carries multichannel sequencing, a parallel and international dialer and website visitor identification on the same seat, where Cognism sends nothing and expects a separate engagement tool beside it.
- Residency is the first procurement question. Cognism states that collected data is generally kept inside the European Economic Area, with any necessary transfer minimised, anonymised where possible and covered by standard data protection clauses, where Apollo hosts with United States providers only.
- You call as much as you email. Cognism screens its telephone data against preference registers in twelve named jurisdictions, both United Kingdom registers plus the United States, Australia, Germany, France and six more, before a number reaches you, and sells a subset of mobile numbers verified by a researcher placing a call.
- You want accuracy measured by someone else. An independent enrichment test across two hundred accounts reported European email accuracy near ninety one percent and mobile connect rates near eighty seven percent, both leading the tested cohort, and a published customer case study supplies its own bounce rate baseline.
This comparison is published by GTM Tech Index, an independent research platform that compares go to market software vendors objectively. Apollo.io and Cognism are each graded against the same capability taxonomy, from each vendor's own public materials, under the GTM Tech Index verification standard. No vendor pays for placement, and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Plain facts
| Apollo.io | Cognism | |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Data & Enrichment | Data & Enrichment |
| Founded | Not published | 2015 |
| Headquarters | Not published | London, United Kingdom |
| Website | www.apollo.io | www.cognism.com |
Side by Side
| Axis | A Apollo.io |
C Cognism |
|---|---|---|
|
AI Capability
|
||
| AI Centrality | ||
| Autonomy and Oversight Model | ||
| AI Disclosure and Model Transparency | ||
| Operational and Outcome Evidence | ||
|
Compliance and Risk
|
||
| Outreach Compliance Posture | ||
| Data Privacy Posture | ||
| Data Licensing and Provenance | ||
| Platform Terms Exposure | ||
| AI Safety and Data Stewardship | ||
| Recipient Disclosure and Authenticity | ||
|
Integration and Deployment
|
||
| Ecosystem and Integration Depth | ||
| Deployment Model and Data Residency | ||
| Security Certifications and Trust Center | ||
|
Commercial and Operational
|
||
| Commercial Transparency | ||
| Exit and Data Portability | ||
| Deliverability and Sending Discipline | ||
| Segment and Market Coverage | ||
The short version of each
Apollo.io
Apollo.io, the trading name of ZenLeads, Inc., sells a large business contact database together with multichannel sequencing, a parallel dialer, website visitor identification and intent signals, priced for self serve buyers with a permanent free plan. An AI Assistant launched in March 2026 runs outbound workflows from plain language instructions, and the Pocus acquisition the same month added signal based revenue intelligence. The GTM Tech Index grades it A on four axes: commercial transparency, where its five published tiers are the index benchmark, data licensing and provenance, where it names three sourcing routes including a contributor network of more than two million people, data privacy, and outreach compliance, where it is a registered data broker in California, Oregon, Texas and Vermont. It grades D on deliverability discipline, publishing no warmup, placement testing or bounce threshold for a platform that sends from the customer's own mailbox.
Source: GTM Tech Index, 2026
Cognism
Cognism is a London based business contact and company data provider founded in 2015 and sold on compliance and phone verification rather than database size, delivered through a prospecting interface, automatic record enrichment and a data as a service route by interface or file. A subset of mobile numbers is verified by a researcher placing a call and sold as Diamond Data. The GTM Tech Index grades it A on data privacy posture, where legitimate interest is named to the provision and people are notified that they are held, and A on outreach compliance, where telephone data is screened against preference registers in twelve named jurisdictions before delivery. It holds the information security and privacy information management certifications and states that data is generally kept inside the European Economic Area. It grades D on commercial transparency: a page promising clear pricing explains the credit mechanic in full and publishes no number.
Source: GTM Tech Index, 2026
Common questions
Is Apollo.io better than Cognism?
They are built for different buyers. Apollo is a database with a sequencer and dialer attached, sold self serve with every price published and a permanent free plan. Cognism is a database that sends nothing, sold through a sales conversation to teams that need European residency, preference register screening and verified mobile numbers. The GTM Tech Index grades both at ten axes of seventeen at A or B, and they reach that count on almost opposite axes.
Which one is better for European prospects?
Cognism, on the evidence published. It states that data is generally kept inside the European Economic Area, screens telephone numbers against preference registers in twelve named jurisdictions, publishes in English, German and French, and has independent accuracy testing on a European sample. Apollo hosts with United States providers only, disclosed in its processing addendum. Both publish a notice to the individuals they hold, and both grade A on data privacy posture, so the difference is residency and screening rather than notice. Graded by GTM Tech Index against seventeen capability axes from each vendor's own published materials, verified September 21, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
How do Apollo.io and Cognism price?
Apollo publishes everything: a free plan, then forty nine, seventy nine and one hundred and nineteen dollars a user a month billed annually, with credit allocations and feature gates per tier. Cognism publishes the mechanics without the number. Two packages include five seats each, one credit reveals one contact, a revealed contact costs nothing to view again and credit is spent again only when the person changes job. Third party procurement reporting places the entry package near fifteen hundred dollars per user a year plus a platform fee. Graded by GTM Tech Index against seventeen capability axes from each vendor's own published materials, verified September 21, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Where does each get its contact data?
Apollo names three routes: a contributor network of more than two million people sharing contacts through named product features, publicly available sources and purchased lists, which earned the first A on data licensing in the GTM Tech Index. Cognism describes four layers: public collection from corporate websites, job postings, news feeds and company registries, its own technographic modelling, intent and event triggers from two named partners, and community sourced data whose mechanism and consent go undescribed.
Which one protects my sending domain?
Cognism sends nothing, so it cannot damage your domain, and it improves the input by verifying email records before delivery and screening phone numbers against preference registers. Apollo grades D on deliverability discipline: it publishes no warmup, placement testing, domain health monitoring or bounce threshold, and its sequences send from your own connected mailbox, so the reputation spent is yours. A team buying Apollo for sequencing should budget for a separate deliverability tool. Graded by GTM Tech Index against seventeen capability axes from each vendor's own published materials, verified September 21, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
How does the GTM Tech Index grade Apollo.io and Cognism?
Both are graded on the same seventeen capability and compliance axes from public sources, at a documented depth of sixteen each. Apollo takes A on commercial transparency, data licensing, data privacy and outreach compliance, and D on deliverability. Cognism takes A on data privacy and outreach compliance and B on eight more, including residency, recipient disclosure and security, and D on commercial transparency. The index publishes no composite score and declares no winner.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Data & Enrichment page.
The shared silence is what you are allowed to keep. Both sell revealed records under licence, and neither publishes what that licence permits after the contract ends. At Apollo, export is metered as a commercial unit, ten export credits a month on the free plan, so leaving with records already paid for is rate limited by the tier. At Cognism, redeemed contacts may be used throughout the contract, a clause that points at the exit question and stops before answering it.
The second shared gap is contributed data. Apollo's contributor network is fed by customers' connected mailboxes, which makes a buyer who connects a mailbox a supplier as well, and Apollo names the features that do it. Cognism describes its community sourced layer only as members who allow matching, with no collection mechanism, consent terms or indemnification stated. The benign reading at both is that the detail sits in the order form rather than on public pages.
Neither names a model provider behind its research and search features or states whether submitted data trains any model. Ask both in writing what licence attaches to revealed and enriched records after termination, and ask Cognism what its community members consent to.