Three months ago I sat with a spreadsheet of 300 LinkedIn profiles I'd pulled manually — a mix of VPs, SDRs, and ops managers spread across SaaS, manufacturing, healthcare, logistics, fintech, agency, retail, professional services, construction, and education. I ran each profile through six Chrome extensions, one at a time, logged every result, and cross-checked found emails against our outbound reply data and our ZeroBounce verification runs. The extensions: Hunter.io, Lusha, Kaspr, Apollo, Wiza, and Skrapp.
This is what I found.
The methodology: 300 profiles, 10 industries, three company-size tiers
I split the 300 profiles into three bands: 1–50 employees (small), 51–500 (mid-market), and 500+ (enterprise). Each industry got 30 profiles. I used a fresh LinkedIn account with a Sales Navigator Teams license to avoid personalization effects. Each extension got a clean install, a fresh credit top-up, and I ran them sequentially — not simultaneously — to avoid any cross-contamination from browser state.
"Match" meant the extension returned an email that passed ZeroBounce verification as deliverable. "Hit rate" is matches divided by profiles tested. "Direct-dial match" was only counted if the number returned was a genuine direct line, verified by a quick test-call sample on a subset of results.
This wasn't a sponsored test. None of these vendors knew I was writing this. I bought credits out of pocket.
Email hit rates, ranked
The headline number everyone wants. Here's how they performed on verified, deliverable email addresses across all 300 profiles.
| Extension | Overall Hit Rate | Enterprise (500+) | Mid-market (51–500) | Small (<50 emp.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lusha | 71% | 82% | 68% | 54% |
| Apollo | 68% | 79% | 66% | 51% |
| Wiza | 65% | 76% | 63% | 49% |
| Hunter.io | 61% | 71% | 60% | 44% |
| Kaspr | 58% | 63% | 59% | 52% |
| Skrapp | 52% | 64% | 51% | 38% |
A few things worth noting. Lusha led overall, but its advantage is almost entirely the enterprise tier — at companies under 50 employees it drops to 54%, barely ahead of Kaspr's 52%. Kaspr was the only tool that flattened out somewhat across tiers; its small-company rate suffered least relative to its enterprise rate. Hunter.io performs well when there's a clean pattern-matched domain (the firstname.lastname@company.com format), but it struggled on anything with a custom or obfuscated format. Skrapp landed last — it's a capable tool, but the data layer simply isn't as deep as the top three.
Direct-dial coverage is where the gap actually hurts
If you work in SaaS or tech, direct-dial doesn't matter as much — everyone picks up Slack. If you're selling into manufacturing, logistics, or construction, a direct dial is often the only viable cold-call path. Here's where things diverged sharply.
Lusha and Kaspr are in a different league on phone data. Hunter.io and Skrapp are effectively email-only tools — that 3% and 2% figure means they occasionally surface a company switchboard, not a direct dial. Apollo's 22% was a genuine surprise; their phone coverage has improved substantially since 2024. Wiza at 14% was disappointing given its price point — it's clearly optimized for email list-building, not phone coverage.
If cold calling is core to your workflow, the choice practically narrows to Lusha and Kaspr.
Fortune 500 vs. the 40-person agency: the numbers diverge fast
I've seen a lot of articles quote a single "accuracy" number and leave it there. That number almost always reflects Fortune 500 performance, because those companies have the most coverage in every vendor's database. The 40-person agency, the 80-person regional logistics firm — those are where real SDRs spend a lot of their day, and they're where every tool gets worse.
Within my small-company band (<50 employees), Lusha dropped from 82% (enterprise) to 54% — a 28-point fall. Apollo fell 28 points too (79% → 51%). Hunter.io fell 27 points (71% → 44%). Kaspr fell only 11 points (63% → 52%) — its EU-leaning data layer seems to have broader SMB coverage, particularly for Western European companies.
If you're prospecting heavily into SMBs, that 11-point gap versus 28-point gap is meaningful over 200 reveals a month.
LinkedIn ToS risk after the 2024 enforcement wave
In late 2024, LinkedIn ran a significant wave of account restrictions and extension warnings. Not all extensions interact with LinkedIn the same way, and the risk profile genuinely differs.
Extensions that query their own database when you visit a LinkedIn page — they recognize the profile URL and look it up server-side — carry essentially no risk. Your browser isn't doing anything LinkedIn can't observe a human doing; you navigated to a profile. Hunter.io, Wiza, Skrapp, and Apollo all work this way.
Extensions that actively read DOM content from the page carry more risk. Kaspr and Lusha have historically touched DOM elements beyond just reading the URL. Both updated their extensions post-2024 to reduce this exposure, but I'd still categorize them as moderate-risk relative to the pure-lookup tools.
I didn't lose any accounts during my test, but I was on a fresh account with no volume pressure. Pushing 50+ reveals per day on your primary LinkedIn account is a different situation. The honest framing: risk exists on a spectrum. Use a secondary account if you're pushing high volumes, regardless of which tool you pick.
Credits and pricing at 200 reveals a month
Most comparison articles show entry pricing without accounting for what an individual SDR actually runs. 200 reveals/month is a realistic ceiling for a rep doing solid manual prospecting without Sales Navigator automation.
| Extension | Plan for ~200 emails/mo | Monthly Cost | Phone Credits Included? | Overage Cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hunter.io | Starter (500 searches) | $34/mo | No | $0.04/search |
| Lusha | Pro (40 credits base) | $29/mo | Yes (5 credits/phone) | $0.40+/credit |
| Kaspr | Start (1,200 email / 240 phone credits) | $49/mo | Yes | Per credit |
| Apollo | Basic (unlimited emails, 600 phone) | $59/mo | Yes | $0.05/phone |
| Wiza | Pro (500 valid emails) | $49/mo | Limited | $0.10/email |
| Skrapp | Starter (200 credits) | $30/mo | No | $0.15/credit |
Hunter.io is the cheapest path to 200 email reveals, and if you never need phone numbers, it does the job. Lusha at $29/month looks cheap until you realize 40 credits covers 40 emails or 8 phone numbers — if you want phone data at volume, the real monthly cost climbs fast. Kaspr at $49/month gives you the most generous phone allowance for its tier. Apollo at $59/month is the most complete option; you also get sequencing, a dialer, and CRM sync included, which changes the cost math if you'd otherwise buy those separately.
Which extensions don't interrupt your flow
This is the UX factor almost no comparison covers, but it genuinely affects rep productivity. I prospected on real profiles during my test and tracked how each extension behaved in normal use.
Apollo loads its sidebar panel quickly and integrates cleanly into the LinkedIn layout. Lusha pops a small widget on the profile that reveals on click — fast, low friction. Wiza is well-built for list exports but clunky for single-profile prospecting; it wants you in a list context, not browsing profile to profile. Hunter.io shows a small icon in the URL bar — subtle, but the reveal itself took 2–3 seconds consistently. Kaspr had a noticeable sidebar load delay (3–4 seconds) every time I navigated to a new profile. Skrapp was the slowest of the six; I regularly waited 5+ seconds, and in two sessions the extension failed to load without a manual page refresh.
If you're visiting 40+ profiles per day, the 4-second Kaspr delay compounds. Lusha and Apollo won on speed and UI polish.
What I actually use
For email-only prospecting at volume on mid-to-large companies: Apollo. The $59/month includes sequencing I'd pay for separately anyway, hit rates are competitive, and the UX is the least disruptive of the six. If your manager is watching seat costs, Hunter.io is the defensible cheap option — accurate on well-structured domains and genuinely useful for pure email campaigns.
For cold-calling pipelines targeting enterprise accounts: Lusha. The 34% direct-dial rate is simply better than anything else here, and the reveal widget is fast. Accept that phone data at scale costs more per credit than the base plan suggests.
For EU-focused prospecting or heavy SMB books of business: Kaspr. The flatter small-company hit rate (11-point drop vs. 28-point drops elsewhere) and generous phone credit allotment make it the right call for reps working non-US markets or mid-market-heavy territories.
Wiza belongs in workflows that start with a Sales Navigator search and end with a CRM upload — it's excellent at list-mode extraction, weaker for profile-by-profile browsing. Skrapp is a workable fallback if budget is a hard constraint, but the speed issues and lower hit rate make it hard to recommend as a primary tool.
None of these is perfect on SMB coverage — that's the honest truth in 2026. Your best return on time is picking the right tool for your dominant account profile, not searching for a single extension that does everything well. Run a free-tier test on 30 profiles from your actual target list before committing to a paid plan; the numbers will tell you what you need to know.
Top comments (0)