Clay vs ZoomInfo
Eight of fourteen models named Clay first on the direct prompt; zero named ZoomInfo. Clay was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and ZoomInfo by fourteen and Clay carries 56 labels and ZoomInfo 57, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in eleven 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
ClayFirst choices, of fourteen modelsZoomInfo
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Clay and ZoomInfo were named in the same answer 156 times, of the 310 answers naming Clay and the 617 naming ZoomInfo. In those answers ZoomInfo took the first choice thirty-eight times and Clay sixteen.
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 | | | |
Clay ZoomInfo first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Clay on the left and ZoomInfo on the right.The direct prompt
Clay 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
ZoomInfo57%#1 of 10Clay7%#3 of 10What the models said about Clay
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid ZoomInfo ($15K+/year), Clay ($167–185+/month)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise-heavy tools like ZoomInfo ($15K+/yr), Cognism (quote-based, high for non-EU focus), or full Clay setups unless your free tier covers it” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · soft negative
“it is not a single authoritative database. It chains providers, requiring technical setup, provider management, and careful credit controls.” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“If you want flexible AI workflows & multiple data vendors: Choose Clay to aggregate multiple providers using waterfall enrichment.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Apollo.io or Clay are the best choices due to their balance of cost, coverage, and ease of integration” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Clay | Waterfall logic across 150+ providers, programmable workflows, automation depth | From $149/mo” Kimi K2 · scale 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.