Head-to-head · B2B data

Hunter.io vs Lusha

Lusha wins 15 of 27 decided metrics across 3 shared suites; the loser still leads where its column is highlighted. Same frozen test sets, same run; the better value in each row is highlighted.

Hunter.io

Email finding, verification and domain search, extended to leads and companies; bulk CSV and official MCP.

★ 4.5 · 1,382 reviewsB

Access: MCP · API · CSV · Webhooks · Integrations

Lusha

Sales intelligence with contact and company data, enrichment, signals and recommendations; extension and API v3.

★ 4.2 · 2,066 reviewsB

Access: MCP · API · CSV · Batch · Webhooks · Integrations

Email Datacore + suite-specific metrics

updated 2026-09-25

Metric	Hunter.io · #9 of 29	Lusha · #18 of 29
Match rate	75.0%	71.7%
Valid email rate	62.2%	62.8%
Latency p50	2,252ms	847ms
Cost / valid email	$0.024	$0.486
Invalid rate	13.3%	4.7%
Catch-all share	24.4%	30.2%
Business email	100.0%	100.0%
Right-person rate	100.0%	97.7%
Decoy hit rate	10.0%	0.0%
Catch-all detection	100.0%	-
Confidence-score quality	+100.0 pts	-
Geographic coverage	10	6

Phone Datacore + suite-specific metrics

updated 2026-09-25

Metric	Hunter.io · not in suite	Lusha · #6 of 24
Match rate	-	81.6%
Valid / reachable rate	-	87.5%
Latency p50	-	739ms
Cost / mobile number	-	$0.974
Right-person rate	-	90.5%
Mobile coverage	-	67.3%
Disconnected rate	-	0.0%
Low-activity share	-	12.5%
Landline / mobile classification	-	100.0%
Country accuracy	-	85.0%
Geographic coverage	-	10

People Datacore + suite-specific metrics

updated 2026-09-25

Metric	Hunter.io · #15 of 24	Lusha · #23 of 24
Profile match rate	44.9%	89.8%
Identity accuracy	100.0%	97.7%
Latency p50	1,223ms	739ms
Price / matched profile	$0.0030	$0.122
Current employer accuracy	90.9%	93.2%
Move detection	25.0%	-
Decoy hit rate	0.0%	-
Job title accuracy	81.8%	81.8%
Seniority label accuracy	-	73.8%
Location accuracy	100.0%	95.5%
Work history completeness	-	0.8
Education completeness	0.0%	0.0%
Skills present	0.0%	0.0%
Social / profile URLs	100.0%	100.0%
Coverage by geo / function / seniority	14.3%	66.7%

Company Datacore + suite-specific metrics

updated 2026-09-25

Metric	Hunter.io · #5 of 23	Lusha · #12 of 23
Domain-to-company match rate	100.0%	99.0%
Company name accuracy	96.0%	94.9%
Latency p50	1,043ms	778ms
Price / matched company	$0.0030	$0.219
Industry accuracy	38.0%	42.4%
Employee count ±20%	25.7%	27.0%
HQ / location accuracy	83.0%	83.8%
Description present	97.0%	99.0%
Founding year accuracy	52.0%	71.7%
Domains / social profiles	0.0%	98.0%
Coverage by country / size	100.0%	95.0%

Technographic Datacore + suite-specific metrics

updated 2026-09-25

Metric	Hunter.io · #3 of 10	Lusha · not measured
Coverage	95.0%	-
Detection accuracy	66.3%	-
Latency p50	1,043ms	-
Cost / lookup	$0.0032	-
Live stack recall	25.4%	-
Technologies per domain	13	-
Dated results	0.0%	-
Coverage by geo / size	90.0%	-

Questions about Hunter.io vs Lusha

Which is better, Hunter.io or Lusha?

Lusha wins 15 of the 27 metrics decided between them, across 3 benchmarks that measured both. Leaderboard ranks: Email Data: Hunter.io #9 of 29, Lusha #18 of 29; People Data: Hunter.io #15 of 24, Lusha #23 of 24; Company Data: Hunter.io #5 of 23, Lusha #12 of 23.

Which is cheaper, Hunter.io or Lusha?

Measured on the list price of each provider's central self-serve pack, divided by what it actually returned: Email Data, cost per valid email: Hunter.io $0.024, Lusha $0.486; People Data, price per matched profile: Hunter.io $0.0030, Lusha $0.122; Company Data, price per matched company: Hunter.io $0.0030, Lusha $0.219.

How do Hunter.io and Lusha compare in user reviews?

Hunter.io holds 4.5 / 5 across 1,382 reviews on G2, Capterra and Product Hunt; Lusha holds 4.2 / 5 across 2,066 reviews on G2 and Capterra. Ratings belong to their platforms and play no part in the benchmark grades.

How can you get data out of Hunter.io and Lusha?

Hunter.io offers an MCP server, an API, CSV export, webhooks and native integrations; Lusha offers an MCP server, an API, CSV export, batch endpoints, webhooks and native integrations. Both offer an MCP server, an API, CSV export, webhooks and native integrations.