Index › GTM › Sales › Sales intel › Apollo.io vs ZoomInfo SalesOS
Sales intelligence and contact data · November 2026 Edition

Apollo.io vs ZoomInfo SalesOS

Eleven of fourteen models named Apollo.io first on the direct prompt; two named ZoomInfo SalesOS. Both were named by all fourteen models and Apollo.io carries 74 labels and ZoomInfo SalesOS 70, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Apollo.io

endorsed leader

San Francisco, United States, founded 2015. Named in twenty-two categories this edition.

ZoomInfo SalesOS

criticized challenger

By ZoomInfo, Vancouver, Washington, United States, founded 2000. Named in three categories this edition.

First-choice share93%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate12%43%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#2A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels7470A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Apollo.io reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Cognism was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers.

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 intelligence and contact data page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Apollo.ioFirst choices, of fourteen modelsZoomInfo SalesOS
Direct1124 against ZoomInfo SalesOS
Paraphrase1406 against ZoomInfo SalesOS
Comparative59
Budget-constrained1409 against ZoomInfo SalesOS
Scale-constrained102 against ZoomInfo SalesOS
Negative009 against Apollo.io · 9 against ZoomInfo SalesOS
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Apollo.io and ZoomInfo SalesOS were named in the same answer 198 times, of the 1129 answers naming Apollo.io and the 219 naming ZoomInfo SalesOS. In those answers ZoomInfo SalesOS took the first choice forty-seven times and Apollo.io ninety.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Apollo.io and ZoomInfo SalesOS stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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 SalesOS first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Apollo.io on the left and ZoomInfo SalesOS on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Apollo.io and ZoomInfo SalesOS stood in it.

Apollo.io first, ZoomInfo SalesOS an alternative

11 of 14 modelsZoomInfo SalesOS was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Apollo.io alternatives: Cognism, HubSpot Sales Hub, ZoomInfo SalesOS
Gemini 3.5 FlashApollo.io alternatives: Clay, Cognism, UpLead, ZoomInfo SalesOS
Perplexity SonarApollo.io alternatives: Cognism, ZoomInfo SalesOS
Grok 4.20Apollo.io alternatives: Cognism, Lusha
DeepSeek V4 FlashApollo.io alternatives: Amplemarket, Cognism, Lusha, UpLead, ZoomInfo SalesOS
Qwen 3.7 FlashApollo.io alternatives: Lusha, ZoomInfo SalesOS
Kimi K2Apollo.io alternatives: Cognism, Lusha
GLM 4.7 FlashXApollo.io alternatives: Cognism, Lusha, ReachStream, ZoomInfo SalesOS
MiniMax M2.5Apollo.io alternatives: Lusha, ReachStream, Seamless.AI
GPT-6 LunaApollo.io alternatives: Cognism, ZoomInfo SalesOS
Muse Glimmer 30BApollo.io alternatives: Cognism, ReachStream, ZoomInfo SalesOS

ZoomInfo SalesOS first, Apollo.io an alternative

2 of 14 modelsApollo.io was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GPT-5.4 miniZoomInfo SalesOS alternatives: Apollo.io, Cognism, D&B Hoovers, SalesIntel
Mistral SmallZoomInfo SalesOS alternatives: Apollo.io, Cognism, SalesTarget.ai Lead Explorer

Neither was the first choice, one was named

1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Llama 4 MaverickReachStream alternatives: Apollo.io, Cognism, FullEnrich, UpLead

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

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Apollo.io leads by ninety-six points.
Apollo.io96%#1 of 8
ZoomInfo SalesOS0%#8 of 8
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Apollo.io leads by eighty-eight points.
Apollo.io93%#1 of 13
ZoomInfo SalesOS5%#2 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: ZoomInfo SalesOS leads at enterprise.
ZoomInfo SalesOS73%#1 of 12
Apollo.io9%#2 of 12
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Apollo.io

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.

“Apollo's data quality issues are well-documented, with users reporting accuracy has declined, particularly for phone numbers.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · hard negative

What the models said about ZoomInfo SalesOS

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 initially unless the company needs enterprise-grade coverage and can justify a substantially higher, quote-based cost.” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · hard negative
“ZoomInfo is subject to numerous complaints and multiple lawsuits concerning its collection and sales of personal data” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“What to Avoid (The "Expensive" Options) * ZoomInfo: Starts at ~$15,000/year... not suitable for limited budgets.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · hard negative
“Highest data accuracy in US enterprise markets... typically LinkedIn Sales Navigator for networking plus one contact database (Apollo or ZoomInfo) for enrichment” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best for detailed B2B data, including firmographics, technographics, and intent data. It's a leader in comprehensive contact and company databases” Mistral Small · comparative prompt · first choice
“Enterprise standard for B2B sales intelligence. 420 million+ contact profiles... Largest B2B contact database, enterprise-grade.” Muse Glimmer 30B · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared

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.