Apollo.io vs ZoomInfo
One of fourteen models named Apollo.io first on the direct prompt; one named ZoomInfo. Apollo.io was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and ZoomInfo by fourteen and Apollo.io carries 37 labels and ZoomInfo 44, 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 B2B intent data providers 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
1 of 14 modelsZoomInfo was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.ZoomInfo first, Apollo.io an alternative
1 of 14 modelsApollo.io was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
7 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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.io62%#1 of 13ZoomInfo2%#7 of 13Apollo.io29%#2 of 12ZoomInfo9%#3 of 12ZoomInfo4%#4 of 9Apollo.io2%#– of 9What the models said about Apollo.io
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“Apollo.io and Bombora are the most frequently recommended due to their balance of affordability, ease of integration, and strong intent signals.” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Best All-in-One Platform (3rd-Party Intent Data): Apollo.io ... Free tier available; paid plans start around $49 to $99/user/month.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget 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. Two of two in this category shown.
“Bidstream-based providers (e.g., ZoomInfo, Demandbase) - Why avoid: These providers harvest intent data from ad auctions, which is legally contested” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“Data accuracy issues: Multiple sources cite outdated contacts, incorrect job titles, and stale information as persistent problems” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
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.