LeaderboardsMobile Finder Providers
Ranked on price, EU & US coverage, accuracy and speed. Tested live on real contacts.
Click a column to re-rank
Hover a row to see its margin of error: faded tail = possible high, white tick = safe floor.
| # | Provider | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Live-tested by ColdIQ · ranked · comparable | ||||||||
| 1 |  Prospeo | 0.0 | $0.39 | 93% | 98% | 85% | 2.1s | Test live |
| 2 |  FullEnrich | 0.0 | $0.55 | 96% | 98% | 80% | 2min | Test live |
| 3 |  LeadMagic | 0.0 | $0.12 | 14% | 88% | 78% | 2.9s | Test live |
| 4 |  AI Ark* | 0.0 | $0.05 | 11% | 48% | 82% | 2.3s | Test live |
| 5 |  Findymail | 0.0 | $0.20 | 4% | 60% | 82% | 2.9s | Test live |
| 6 |  Wiza | 0.0 | $0.35 | 45% | 95% | 76% | 20s | Test live |
| 7 |  Lima Data | 0.0 | $0.20 | 0% | 8% | 65% | 5s | Test live |
| Published · reference only · not live-tested · not ranked | ||||||||
| 1 |  BetterContact | 0.0 | $0.49 | 75% | 80% | 80% | 4min | |
| 2 |  Datagma | 0.0 | $0.35 | 55% | 50% | 74% | 4s | |
| 3 |  Lusha* | 0.0 | $1.00 | 40% | 70% | 75% | 0.6s | |
| 4 |  Cognism* | 0.0 | $1.75 | 62% | 55% | 84% | 5s | |
| 5 |  Kaspr | 0.0 | $0.50 | 66% | 35% | 72% | 2s | |
| 6 |  People Data Labs | 0.0 | $0.28 | 30% | 76% | 66% | 1s | |
| 7 |  RocketReach | 0.0 | $0.32 | 45% | 60% | 69% | 5s | |
| 8 |  SignalHire | 0.0 | $0.15 | 40% | 45% | 70% | 8.5s | |
| 9 |  LinkUp | 0.0 | $0.25 | 25% | 40% | 70% | 12s | Test live |
| 10 |  ContactOut | 0.0 | $0.10 | 35% | 75% | 60% | 2.5s | |
| 11 |  Forager | 0.0 | $0.23 | 35% | 40% | 64% | 5s | |
Editorial estimates · see methodology below · Updated 2026-08-03 · Compare two providers head-to-head →
Metric leaders
The general ranking hides trade-offs. Here is who wins each dimension on its own.
Most accurate
Prospeo85%confirmed numbers
Best value
AI Ark$0.05per found number
Fastest
Prospeo2.1smedian lookup
Accuracy
Leader · ProspeoShare of returned numbers that are valid and connect.
- 1
Prospeo85%
- 2
Cognism84%
- 3
AI Ark82%
- 4Findymail82%
- 5
FullEnrich80%
- 6
BetterContact80%
Coverage · EU vs US
Leader · FullEnrichHow often a mobile is found. Orange is EU, black is US.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4Wiza45% · 95%
- 5
- 6
Lusha40% · 70%
Price per number
Leader · AI ArkUSD per successfully found mobile, misses excluded.
- 1
- 2
ContactOut$0.10
- 3LeadMagic$0.12
- 4
SignalHire$0.15
- 5Findymail$0.20
- 6
Lima Data$0.20
Speed
Leader · LushaMedian seconds for a single lookup.
- 1
- 2
People Data Labs1s
- 3
Kaspr2s
- 4
- 5
- 6
Your GTM stack. One API key.
Stop managing 39 tools. Start shipping GTM from code.
Free to start. No credit card required.
Plan your stack
How many numbers you can expect for your list, and what it costs. One provider or a waterfall, in the order you pick.
Pick providers · selection order = waterfall order
Numbers found
930/ 1,000
Total cost
$363
Cost per found
$0.39
List price × expected hits. Overlap between providers not yet measured: multi-provider reach is an upper bound.
Run this stack on the marketplaceHow the score is built
Each metric is normalized across the field to a score from 0 to 100. Price and speed are inverted since lower is better, and speed uses a log scale so async waterfalls and instant APIs stay comparable. The weighted sum of the five metrics gives the ColdIQ Score. Accuracy carries the most weight: a cheap number that doesn't connect still costs you the dial.
Marketplace providers are tested live. ColdIQ live tests, July 2026 (latest 2026-07-23): 53 real sales contacts (28 EU / 25 US across 15 companies and 6 verticals), every provider called through the same ColdIQ marketplace endpoints as the live benchmark tool. We measure per-region hit rate, median lookup latency, and agreement between providers as an accuracy signal. Providers we can't call ourselves are compiled from published benchmarks (Clay×TitanX regional test on 9,806 numbers, Outbound Kitchen US benchmark on 1,400 contacts, Cleanlist API tests) and official pricing pages, with sources on every row of the dataset.
Scores carry uncertainty. For live-tested rows the coverage margin is the Wilson 95% interval of the run (its exact hit counts show on hover); for compiled rows it comes from published benchmarks. Propagated through the weighted aggregate, that puts a margin of roughly 12 to 15 points around every score. Treat providers within a few points of each other as statistical ties: the order is our best estimate, not a proven gap.
Figures remain estimates: coverage swings with your ICP, geography and list quality, and phone data shifts weekly. Every pricing figure is re-checked against the provider's official page (each row's sources carry their verification date, latest 2026-08-03), and rows are rescored as new tests land.
The fastest way to know what works on your market: run the same lookup against several providers side by side.
Work at one of these providers? If a figure looks wrong, dispute it. Point us at the source (or provision a test API key) and we re-run the protocol and publish whatever it says, within 7 days.
Benchmark them on your own leadsScore weights
a wrong number costs a call
find rate on European contacts
find rate on US contacts
per found number, cheaper scores higher
median lookup time, faster scores higher
Frequently asked questions
Each of the five metrics is normalized to 0–100 across the field (price and speed inverted, speed on a log scale), then combined with fixed weights: accuracy 35%, EU coverage 15%, US coverage 15%, price 20%, speed 15%. The ranking is computed automatically from the raw data, with no manual adjustment.
See how they rank on your own leads.
Run the same lookup against these providers on your own list, live, side by side, one API key.