Apollo.io vs ZoomInfo
Eight of fourteen models named Apollo.io first on the direct prompt; zero named ZoomInfo. Both were named by all fourteen models and Apollo.io carries 75 labels and ZoomInfo 57, so the shares are not directly comparable.
San Francisco, United States, founded 2015. Named in twenty-two categories this edition.
Vancouver, Washington, United States, founded 2000. Named in fifteen categories this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the data enrichment page.
By framing
Apollo.ioFirst choices, of fourteen modelsZoomInfo
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Apollo.io and ZoomInfo were named in the same answer 336 times, of the 1129 answers naming Apollo.io and the 617 naming ZoomInfo. In those answers ZoomInfo took the first choice fifty-four times and Apollo.io 132.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | | | |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | | |
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | | | ||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | | |
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | | |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | | |
Apollo.io ZoomInfo first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Apollo.io on the left and ZoomInfo on the right.The direct prompt
Apollo.io first, ZoomInfo an alternative
8 of 14 modelsZoomInfo was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
Apollo.io81%#1 of 9ZoomInfo0%#9 of 9Apollo.io63%#1 of 9ZoomInfo2%#4 of 9ZoomInfo57%#1 of 10Apollo.io2%#8 of 10What the models said about Apollo.io
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.
“Widespread reports of inaccurate/outdated contact data ... BBB complaints about unauthorized distribution of personal phone numbers” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Users experience data inaccuracy with Apollo.io, leading to unreliable contact information that requires verification.” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · hard negative
“Apollo.io - Best overall for SMB and agencies, with a large database, built-in email sequences, and a dialer at a published per-seat price.” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about ZoomInfo
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.
“High volume of BBB complaints ... Multiple lawsuits ... Reviews criticize inaccurate data, poor usability, long contracts, high costs” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“What to Avoid: ZoomInfo: Excellent data but enterprise-priced ($15,000+/year) — overkill for most mid-market budgets” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · hard negative
“Stick to reputable providers: Tools like ZoomInfo, Clearbit (now part of HubSpot), Apollo.io, or LinkedIn Sales Navigator are widely used and vetted.” MiniMax M2.5 · negative prompt · first choice
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.