Apollo.io vs Outreach
Five of fourteen models named Apollo.io first on the direct prompt; three named Outreach. Both were named by all fourteen models and Apollo.io carries 66 labels and Outreach 61, so the shares are not directly comparable.
San Francisco, United States, founded 2015. Named in twenty-two categories this edition.
Named in thirteen 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 sales engagement platforms page.
By framing
Apollo.ioFirst choices, of fourteen modelsOutreach
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Apollo.io and Outreach were named in the same answer 169 times, of the 1129 answers naming Apollo.io and the 309 naming Outreach. In those answers Outreach took the first choice forty-four times and Apollo.io forty-five.
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 Outreach first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Apollo.io on the left and Outreach on the right.The direct prompt
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.Apollo.io first, Outreach an alternative
4 of 14 modelsOutreach was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Outreach first, Apollo.io an alternative
2 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.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.io50%#1 of 14Outreach2%#9 of 14Apollo.io30%#2 of 12Outreach9%#4 of 12Outreach52%#1 of 9Apollo.io2%#5 of 9What the models said about Apollo.io
No label in this category carried a quote.
What the models said about Outreach
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 heavy enterprise tools like Outreach, Salesloft, or LinkedIn Sales Navigator add-ons” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Outreach if you're not a large enterprise with dedicated implementation support” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · hard negative
“What to Avoid - Outreach and Salesloft: ... overkill for limited budgets.” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“It is widely considered the most robust and flexible platform... However, it can be complex to set up and is expensive.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Outreach has the deepest sequence builder, best-in-class A/B testing, and revenue intelligence layered on top.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
“Choose Outreach for complex enterprise sales processes, strong governance, and advanced orchestration.” Perplexity Sonar · comparative 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.