Cognism and Lusha split by criterion and judge; no overall winner emerges. Cognism leads sovereignty (5.5 vs 1.7; 6 judges lean Cognism, 0 Lusha, 0 tie) — its data residency attribute reads EU only, Lusha's US by default — and prospecting compliance (3.7 vs 3.0; 3 lean Cognism, 1 Lusha, 2 ties). Lusha leads CRM sync and export (4.8 vs 4.0; 5 lean Lusha, 1 Cognism) and pricing transparency (4.0 vs 2.0; 5 lean Lusha, 1 Cognism): Lusha publishes prices, Cognism's plans route to a quote. The splits: data coverage ties at 2.8 vs 2.8 (2 lean Cognism, 3 Lusha, 1 tie); data provenance, 1 Cognism, 2 Lusha, 3 ties (4.0 vs 3.7); visitor identification drew 5 ties (2.0 vs 1.7). Weighted totals: Lusha ahead for the SDR lead (4 vs 3.2), RevOps (4.1 vs 3.8), ABM marketer (3.6 vs 3) and skeptic (4 vs 3.5); Cognism for the data protection officer (4 vs 0).
Choose Cognism if
Your compliance mandate requires personal data stored in the EU — Cognism's data residency attribute reads EU only against Lusha's US by default, and sovereignty leans 6 judges to Cognism, 0 to Lusha, 0 ties.
Your procurement policy avoids US legal entities — Cognism's legal entity jurisdiction is GB, Lusha's is US.
A data protection officer signs off on the purchase — that judge's weighted total is 4 for Cognism against 0 for Lusha.
Your outbound calling puts prospecting compliance first — 3 judges lean Cognism on that criterion against 1 for Lusha, 2 ties.
You want a privacy notice that names its source categories with a self-service opt-out — cited in Cognism's provenance verdict, where its mean is 4.0 vs 3.7 though judges split 1 Cognism, 2 Lusha, 3 ties.
Choose Lusha if
Your team runs Salesforce, HubSpot, Monday or Zoho — CRM sync and export leans 5 judges to Lusha against 1 for Cognism, mean 4.8 vs 4.0.
You need published prices before a sales conversation — Lusha publishes prices, Cognism's plans route to an individual quote, and pricing transparency leans 5 judges to Lusha against 1, mean 4.0 vs 2.0.
Your buyer sits in the SDR lead, RevOps, ABM marketer or skeptic seat — Lusha's weighted totals lead each: 4 vs 3.2, 4.1 vs 3.8, 3.6 vs 3, 4 vs 3.5.
You need published volume figures — Lusha's data coverage verdict credits 290M+ contacts, 165M+ emails, 117M+ direct dials and 29M+ companies, with 3 judges leaning Lusha on coverage against 2 for Cognism, 1 tie.
You must keep exported data after ending the contract — Lusha's CRM sync and export verdict notes terms letting customers keep exported data after termination.
Read this comparison as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The SDR Team Lead
Runs eight SDRs against a monthly meeting target. Wants filters that find the right buyer at the right company, emails that do not bounce, and direct dials that reach a person. Measures a database by connect rate, not by the record count on the homepage.
Cognism
Lusha
This judge's pick
Criterion by criterion
Coverage, accuracy & freshness
Cognism
Verified-mobile filters and on-demand mobile verification are the only accuracy mechanics named, alongside firmographics reaching revenue, headcount and technology — respectable for connect-rate work. But we found no public information on record counts, DACH or country-level coverage, refresh cadence or verification method, so I cannot judge whether a German filter feeds my reps five usable contacts or five thousand.
Lusha
The homepage splits 290M+ contacts into 165M+ emails and 117M+ direct dials, shows weekly refresh on 26 buying signals and even a decay study, but nothing on DACH or per-country coverage, and we found no description of how contact records are verified or re-verified — so I cannot judge connect rate from these pages. The terms sell the platform "as is", so the cost of a bad record lands on my reps, and we found no bounce guarantee or credit-back terms.
Data sources & lawful basis
Cognism
Sources are named in categories — third-party data vendors with the list available on request, customers who opted to share, direct correspondence — with a Privacy Centre form for removal and Standard Contractual Clauses for transfers, which is more than a bare GDPR badge (the FAQ poses the GDPR question with the answer not shown on page). We found no public information on the lawful basis for the contacts in the database, on a legitimate-interest balancing, or on notifying the people listed, so my reps cannot answer a prospect who asks how they were found.
Lusha
Sources are named — data brokers, public APIs, and a Community Program where members share CRM, email-header and calendar data about their contacts — and the listed people get a privacy notice, a permanent suppression list, and published opt-out statistics with zero denials. But we found no public statement of the legitimate-interest basis for EU records and no description of people being notified when added, which is exactly what my prospects ask about first.
Visitor identification & intent signals
Cognism
Intent data, hires, job changes and funding rounds are offered as filters and account-prioritisation signals — exactly the triggers my team calls on. We found no public information on identifying companies behind website visits, on how intent is scored or where it comes from, or on any consent position for a tracking script.
Lusha
Website visitor identification and intent topics appear in the feature list and in tiered form (five topics on lower plans, twenty-five with unlimited results on the top one). We found no public information on how identification works, whether it stops at company level, what the script sets, or its consent position under German tracking law — nothing here I could defend to a DPO.
Prospecting workflow & outreach rules
Cognism
Firmographic, technographic and signal-based filters, targeted list building and export to the CRMs are clearly evidenced, and the pitch is compliant data for the right approach at the right time. We found no public information on a do-not-contact or suppression list, country-specific outreach flags, do-not-call register checks, or guidance on cold-email and cold-call rules — every legal check stays manual on my side.
Lusha
Basic and advanced filters, buying signals, and a vendor-maintained suppression list plus a do-not-call certification give me a workable search-and-suppress workflow. But we found no guidance on cold-outreach rules in the main EU markets and no country-aware flagging, and the terms put call-recording consent and deletion-on-request squarely on my reps rather than the product.
CRM sync, enrichment & export
Cognism
Direct export to Salesforce, HubSpot and Pipedrive, an add-on that automatically enriches CRM records and keeps them current, and API or bulk access via Data-as-a-Service — with one credit covering prospecting, enrichment and API reuse — cover the working week. We found no public information on field mapping, deduplication, API limits, or what happens to exported data when the subscription ends.
Lusha
Salesforce, HubSpot, Monday and Zoho with direct export, CRM and CSV enrichment, webhooks and MCP, and records kept current without re-running an export — plus a plainly stated right to keep exported data after termination, which I respect. We found no public information on field mapping or deduplication, and API limits are only described as strict, with no numbers and no published credit cost per call.
European sovereignty
Cognism
Hosting is AWS in Ireland with a stated EU-storage position, a Croatian joint-controller entity stands alongside the UK company under the Croatian data-protection authority, and non-EU recipients in North Macedonia and the UK are named with Standard Contractual Clauses as the transfer basis. The contracting terms run under England and Wales law, the data-vendor list is available only on request, and the named sales-engagement processors are mostly US, which keeps this short of full European sovereignty.
Lusha
Both contracting entities are US and Israeli joint controllers, contact data sits on AWS in the United States, and the terms authorize processing in any country where Lusha or its subprocessors maintain facilities, with SCCs and a published subprocessor list as the stated safeguards. We found no EU hosting option and no EU representative named — for a database full of EU professionals this is the part a DACH buyer cannot sign off on.
Pricing transparency
Cognism
Standard and Pro tiers appear with five licences each but no figures, the only path to a price is an individual quote, and Data-as-a-Service plus CRM-enrichment pricing sit behind collapsed FAQ entries. The credit mechanics are unusually clear — one credit per unlocked contact, pooled across users, free browsing and free reuse for enrichment and API — but we found no public information on the price per credit, credit expiry, or additional seats, so no annual cost can be computed from the public pages.
Lusha
Four tiers carry public prices with credit allowances and a stated yearly discount, and the terms say credits expire at term end while the pricing page shows a monthly rollover cap on some plans — the captured pages give different figures for rollover. We found no public price for what a credit buys per data type, for extra seats, for the top tier, or for VAT treatment, so I still cannot compute the annual invoice for a team of eight.
Sovereignty, side by side
Dimension
Cognism
Lusha
Legal entity
Incorporated in DE
Incorporated in US
Ownership
Not determined
Not determined
Data residency
Not determined
US by default
Subprocessors
US CLOUD Act reach
US CLOUD Act reach
Facts, side by side
Only facts both products carry under the same definition — anything else would not be a fair row.