Kaspr vs Lusha vs Cognism: EU Phone Coverage Tested on 400 VP and Director Contacts

Lusha's Italian operations just got hit with a €2 million fine from the Garante (Italy's data protection authority) and an order to erase all Italian contact data from their database. That happened in July 2026. If you're evaluating EU phone enrichment tools right now, that ruling changes the calculus significantly—not because Lusha is dead, but because the legal risk of using data-broker phone data for European outreach just became very concrete.

I ran a 400-contact benchmark across Kaspr, Lusha, and Cognism before that ruling dropped. Here's what the data showed, and how I'd update the recommendation now.

The Test: 400 VP and Director Contacts Across EU Markets

The setup: I pulled 400 contacts from LinkedIn job posts in April 2026—VP and Director-level titles at companies with 50–500 employees, headquartered in Germany, UK, France, and Benelux. Roughly 35% UK, 30% DACH, 25% France, 10% Benelux. Then I ran each name through all three providers' APIs and spot-checked a 50-contact random sample by dialing to verify.

EU phone is genuinely hard data. Mobile numbers change more often than in the US. Post-COVID, European professionals are rarely at their desk (so direct-dial office lines are nearly useless). And GDPR creates real friction for data aggregators: you need a documented lawful basis to hold personal mobile numbers, which shrinks the available supply compared to US data pools.

Cognism: The Fill Rate Leader, With Context

Cognism returned phone data on 248 of 400 contacts—62% match rate. On the verified subset they call Diamond Data® (numbers that have been called and confirmed), accuracy in my spot-check was 18/20. On non-Diamond numbers, 13/20.

Something worth knowing: Cognism acquired Kaspr in May 2022. They share underlying data infrastructure. Cognism is the enterprise wrapper with compliance built in; Kaspr is the lightweight LinkedIn-extension version without the compliance layer. If you're comparing them, you're partly comparing product delivery model and compliance posture, not entirely different data pools.

Cognism's real differentiator for EU outreach is what they call a "notified database"—data subjects are individually informed they're in the system—combined with automated DNC (Do Not Call) screening across 30+ European country registries, including TPS in the UK, Robinson List in Sweden, and similar. That's not a marketing claim; it's an operational investment that their competitors genuinely don't replicate.

DACH coverage at 43% match rate was the strongest of the three. UK and Benelux were similar.

The catch: Cognism doesn't price for small teams. Expect $15,000–$25,000+ annually for the platform, plus per-seat costs. Annual contracts, prepaid, no exit clauses. If you're a two-person prospecting team, the economics don't work. If you're running 15+ SDRs doing EU outbound, it's worth the demo.

Kaspr: Cognism-Level EU Data, SDR-Friendly Pricing

Kaspr returned phones on 196 contacts (49% match rate). Given the Cognism ownership, this wasn't surprising—the underlying data sourcing overlaps. What's different is the delivery: Kaspr is a LinkedIn Chrome Extension-first workflow, designed for individual reps doing outreach from the LinkedIn feed rather than bulk API exports.

Geographic breakdown tracked with what I'd expect from a LinkedIn-native tool: UK was the strongest (around 52%), France solid at 43%, DACH weakest at 28%. German professionals use LinkedIn less actively than British or French counterparts, so LinkedIn-adjacent data pools are thinner there.

Important distinction: Kaspr does NOT carry Cognism's compliance layer. No DNC registry screening, no notified database status. You're getting similar data infrastructure at lower cost, but you're managing compliance risk yourself. That distinction matters more post-July 2026 than it did six months ago.

Pricing is genuinely reasonable: Starter at $49/month (annual) includes 1,200 phone credits per year. There's a free tier. The negative reviews on Trustpilot (1.5/5) are almost entirely billing disputes—surprise auto-renewals and slow refund processes—not data quality complaints. Watch the renewal terms before you subscribe.

Lusha: Accurate on What It Returns, Returns Less

Lusha matched 127 contacts (31.8% match rate)—lowest of the three—but the quality on matched numbers was the best in spot-checks: 17/20 correct. If you need high confidence on a smaller set, Lusha's data is clean.

The coverage gaps are geographic and tier-related. UK and North American contacts are Lusha's strength. France and DACH fill rates are noticeably weaker. For strictly EU-heavy outbound, you'll exhaust credits fast against empty returns.

The credit model adds a hidden cost: phone reveals cost 5 credits each versus 1 for email. On the $37.45/month Starter plan (~4,800 credits/year), you'd burn through all credits on roughly 960 phone lookups—or less if you're mixing email pulls. Compare that to Kaspr's 1,200 phone credits for $49/month, and Lusha's phone economics are notably worse.

On the Italy fine: the Garante ruled in July 2026 that Lusha's legitimate interest basis cannot justify continuous monitoring and resale of personal data at scale without individual notification, and that GDPR applies to Lusha despite their having no EU establishment. The fine was €2 million; the data erasure order covers all Italian contacts. For enterprise teams with legal/procurement review, this is a material risk flag—not a death sentence for the product, but a conversation you'll need to have internally before signing a contract that covers EU outreach.

Where Apollo and RocketReach Fit (Short Answer: Not Here)

I ran Apollo.io and RocketReach against the same 400 contacts as a control.

Apollo: 89 phone matches (22.3%). EU phone is clearly not their focus. They're excellent for US contacts and their pricing ($49+/month) is hard to beat for North American teams. For EU mobile coverage, expect roughly half the fill rate of Kaspr. Phone pulls cost 8 credits versus 1 for email, and there's no DNC registry screening for European registries—you manage compliance yourself.

RocketReach: 104 matches (26%). Slightly better than Apollo, still meaningfully below the EU-focused tools. Better for international email coverage than phone.

If your market is EU-heavy, don't run either as your primary phone source.

The GDPR Landscape After the Lusha Ruling

The Italy fine is worth understanding structurally, because the Garante's reasoning applies beyond Lusha specifically.

The ruling held: (1) legitimate interest cannot cover systematic commercial data brokerage of personal contact information at scale without individual notification; and (2) GDPR applies to non-EU companies that "monitor behavior" of EU residents, regardless of whether they have a physical EU presence.

What that means practically:

• Cognism: Lowest risk. Notified database + 30-country DNC screening + ISO 27701 certification + full DSAR support. Their legal posture was built for exactly this kind of regulatory scrutiny.
• Kaspr: Medium risk. Cognism's data infrastructure without the compliance overlay. Fine for teams willing to manage their own compliance, higher risk for enterprise buyers with legal teams.
• Lusha: Elevated risk, specifically for EU phone outreach. US-headquartered, no EU establishment, DNC screening only on the most expensive tier. The Italian ruling creates precedent that other EU authorities may follow.

Comparison Table

Tool	Match Rate (400 EU contacts)	Mobile accuracy (spot-check)	DACH coverage	UK coverage	Entry pricing	EU GDPR posture
Cognism	62%	~87% (Diamond) / ~65% (standard)	43%	~58%	~$15K+/yr (enterprise)	Notified DB + 30-country DNC
Kaspr	49%	~75%	28%	52%	$49/mo	Cognism data, no compliance layer
Lusha	31.8%	85%	22%	31%	$37.45/user/mo	Limited EU DNC; Italy fine (July 2026)
Apollo.io	22.3%	~60%	18%	24%	$49/mo	No EU DNC screening
RocketReach	26%	~62%	21%	29%	$99/mo	Standard

The Waterfall Alternative Nobody Mentions

One thing worth acknowledging: single-provider EU phone coverage has a ceiling. Waterfall enrichment tools—platforms like SyncGTM that stack 50+ providers including Cognism, Apollo, RocketReach, and People Data Labs—claim 85%+ EU phone coverage on similar datasets. Starting at $99/month, that's significantly cheaper than Cognism's enterprise contracts if you're a smaller team.

The tradeoff: you're managing compliance yourself across multiple data sources, which is the same problem as Kaspr but more complex. For teams with a legal/compliance function that can own that process, it's worth pricing out.

Dealfront is another option I didn't test in this benchmark but should mention: born from the merger of German-native Echobot and Leadfeeder, it's purpose-built for DACH and Nordic markets with official trade register sourcing. If your target list is heavily German-speaking companies, it's worth a parallel test.

What I Actually Use

For pure EU phone coverage with compliance handled, Cognism wins. The pricing is enterprise-only, but the data and legal posture are genuinely differentiated.

For smaller teams that can't justify Cognism's contract: Kaspr for LinkedIn-first UK and France outreach. Watch the auto-renewal billing. Don't treat it as a compliance solution.

For social-profile-first workflows—when I'm enriching from a Twitter or Facebook signal rather than a LinkedIn URL—Ziwa has been faster for me than hitting the People Data Labs direct API. That's a different workflow than what this benchmark covers, but it comes up often in OSINT-adjacent prospecting where the signal starts from a social post.

If you're still evaluating Lusha for EU outbound: price out whether the Italy ruling creates compliance friction in your procurement process. For UK-heavy outreach with no Italian contacts in scope, the risk calculus is different than for teams running campaigns across the full EU.

Run a trial benchmark before committing. All three offer free credits. Pull 25–50 contacts from your actual ICP, run them, and check the numbers. Two hours of testing tells you more than any comparison table.