whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Lead Generation

Hunter

Rest of world Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Hunter Web Services, Inc. · hunter.io

Compare with Snov.io → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The RevOps Manager

Weighted verdict

Owns the CRM and cleans up after every tool sales buys. Wants sync with field mapping and deduplication, re-enrichment that updates rather than duplicates, objections that propagate into synced records, and exit terms that say what the company may keep.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The RevOps Manager

Coverage, accuracy & freshness

How this is scored

How much of the target market the database actually covers — judged on DACH and EU coverage as much as North American — and what the vendor documents about verification and refresh, because accuracy claims cannot be checked from outside.

0 — No stated coverage, no refresh cadence, no verification method; accuracy asserted as a percentage with nothing behind it.

3 — Headline record counts for the whole database, thin or unstated European coverage, and no description of how often records are re-verified.

5 — Coverage stated per country or region including DACH, email verification described, a stated refresh cadence, and firmographics beyond name and domain.

8 — Coverage broken down by country, industry and data type (email, direct dial, mobile), verification method and refresh cadence documented, company data drawn from official registers where available, and a bounce or credit-back guarantee with stated terms.

10 — The vendor is accountable for its data: per-country coverage and accuracy methodology published, every field carrying a last-verified date visible to the user, register-sourced company data, and credit-back terms that make inaccuracy the vendor's cost rather than the buyer's.

Report an error

The RevOps Manager

Headline numbers exist (650M+ public sources of data, 1.2B+ leads contacted), but there is no country-level or DACH coverage statement and no re-verification cadence; the nearest freshness fact is that profiles are removed within three months of leaving their source pages. Generated emails carry confidence scores and deliverability validation, yet we found no public information on accuracy methodology, register-sourced company data, or credit-back terms for inaccurate records. 1 3 4

Report an error

Data sources & lawful basis

How this is scored

Where the personal data in the database comes from and on what legal basis it is processed — as evidenced on the vendor's own pages. Covers Art. 6(1)(f) legitimate interest, the Art. 14 notice to the people in the database, and whether they can find, object to and remove their record.

0 — No statement of where contact data comes from or on what legal basis; "GDPR-compliant" asserted without explanation, and no way for a listed person to object.

3 — Sources described in general terms ("public sources", "partners"), legitimate interest named without any balancing, and an opt-out request form as the only route for data subjects.

5 — Source categories named (registers, company websites, contributory networks, licensed partners), legitimate interest stated as the basis for EU records, a dedicated privacy notice for the people in the database, and a self-service opt-out or removal process.

8 — The above plus an Art. 14 notification practice described (people informed when added), contributory or browser-extension collection disclosed as such, a legitimate-interest assessment summarised publicly, and EU records handled differently from US records where the law differs.

10 — Provenance is traceable per record: the source and collection date available for each contact, Art. 14 notices sent and documented, the balancing test published, objections honoured across the whole dataset and suppressed permanently, and no data sourced by scraping behind logins or from contributors' address books without their contacts' knowledge.

Report an error

The RevOps Manager

Sources are described concretely — emails collected from pages where they were published plus pattern-generated addresses from public sources, with the robot respecting robots.txt and skipping private consumer data — and a Legitimate Interest Assessment and DPIA are described, with summaries available on request. People in the database get a self-service claim-and-delete route and profiles drop within three months of leaving their sources. What is missing for a higher score: we found no public information on notifying individuals when they are added, nor per-record source and collection date traceability. 3

Report an error

Visitor identification & intent signals

How this is scored

Identifying companies behind website visits and surfacing buying intent — scored on what is identified (company or person), how the tracking works, and whether the vendor states that its script needs consent under §25 TDDDG and how it behaves without it.

0 — No visitor identification or intent data, or person-level identification of EU visitors with no statement of legal basis.

3 — Reverse-IP company identification with a cookie-setting script, no statement about consent, and match rates claimed without method.

5 — Company-level identification with filters, visit history per company, a stated position that the script requires consent where it sets cookies, and a consent-mode or cookieless option.

8 — Company-level only for EU traffic by design, cookieless operation documented, integration with common consent management platforms, intent topics or page-level signals with the source of third-party intent data named, and alerts routed to owners.

10 — Identification that survives a DPO review: no personal data of visitors stored, the TDDDG and GDPR position published and specific, third-party intent data sourced from a named co-op or panel with its consent basis stated, and scoring on intent that the user can trace back to the underlying visits.

Report an error

The RevOps Manager

We found no public information on website visitor identification, company-level or otherwise, on intent data, or on any tracking script and its consent position. The pricing table carries a line called Signals with plan limits, but the captured pages include no description of what it does. 2

Report an error

Prospecting workflow & outreach rules

How this is scored

Search, list building and outreach — and whether the product helps the buyer stay within UWG §7 and the GDPR once the list exists, rather than leaving the legal risk entirely with the customer.

0 — A search box and an export button; nothing on the pages about what the buyer may lawfully do with the contacts.

3 — Filters on firmographics and job title, saved lists, and a terms clause making the customer solely responsible for compliance.

5 — Advanced filters including technographics and triggers, company-level lists and alerts, a global suppression or do-not-contact list, and guidance on cold outreach rules in the main EU markets.

8 — The above plus country-aware handling (for example flagging German contacts where cold calls and emails require consent), phone numbers checked against national do-not-call registers where they exist, and opt-outs from outreach synced back to the database.

10 — Compliance is part of the workflow: outreach channels restricted or flagged per country and contact type by default, suppression shared across the whole account and every export, the Art. 14 notice supported at first contact, and a documented record of how each contact entered the buyer's pipeline.

Report an error

The RevOps Manager

Search filters, saved leads and built-in cold sequences are all there, and the vendor says it will "help you comply with data protection regulations", but the terms make the buyer an independent controller and that is where the compliance support appears to end. We found no public information on a global suppression or do-not-contact list, country-aware flagging of German or EU contacts, checks against do-not-call registers, or guidance on cold outreach rules in the main EU markets. 1 2 3 4

Report an error

CRM sync, enrichment & export

How this is scored

Getting the data into the systems where sales works — CRM sync, enrichment of existing records, API — and what happens to exported data, and to the buyer's access to it, when the subscription ends.

0 — Manual CSV export only; no CRM integration and no API.

3 — A one-way push to one CRM, CSV export, and no statement on whether exported data may be kept after cancellation.

5 — Native sync with the major CRMs including field mapping and deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, and a documented API with stated limits.

8 — Bidirectional sync with scheduled re-enrichment, update and deletion propagated when a record changes or a person objects, webhook or API access with credit costs per call published, and data retention rights after cancellation stated plainly.

10 — The vendor treats the buyer's CRM as the system of record: objections and corrections propagated into synced records automatically, full change history per field, a versioned API with a deprecation policy, and exit terms that say exactly which data the customer may keep and for how long.

Report an error

The RevOps Manager

There is native sync to HubSpot, Salesforce, Zoho and Pipedrive plus CSV export, a public API and an MCP server — more than a one-way push to a single CRM. But we found no public information on field mapping, deduplication, or whether re-enrichment updates records rather than duplicating them; and the terms reserve the right to discontinue API access with or without notice, while we found no statement on what data a customer may keep after cancellation. 1 2 4

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where a database of EU residents' personal data is held, who the contracting entity and controller are, and which subprocessors see it. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted heavily here, because the product itself is personal data about people who never chose the vendor.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and EU residents' contact data processed outside the EU with no stated transfer basis.

3 — Non-EU contracting entity with an EU representative under Art. 27, or EU hosting offered while enrichment, support or AI processing stay non-EU.

5 — EU contracting entity and EU hosting as standard, but parts of the chain — data partners, enrichment sources, tracking infrastructure — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.

8 — EU contracting entity and controller, EU hosting on named infrastructure, subprocessor and data-partner list published, and any non-EU transfer named with its legal basis.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, controller, hosting, data partners and every subprocessor European, certification published, and a DPA covering both the customer's data and the database records the customer exports.

Report an error

The RevOps Manager

Servers are stated to be in Belgium, transfers out of the EEA are acknowledged with Standard Contractual Clauses and the International Data Transfer Agreement, and a subprocessor list is published at a stated address — real transparency. But the contracting entity is a Delaware company under Delaware law with only an Irish representative, and the AI features route content through OpenAI with retention of up to 30 days, so the chain is partly transparent without being European end to end. 3 4

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone — including credits per email, phone number and mobile, credit expiry, seat pricing, visitor-identification tiers and the API — in a category where the unit of billing is often invented by the vendor.

0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.

3 — A monthly headline exists, but what a credit buys, whether credits expire, or the cost of an additional seat is unstated — the invoice is unknowable.

5 — Tier prices public with credit allowances given, but at least one commonly needed piece (mobile numbers, extra seats, API access, CRM sync) is unpriced or behind a sales call.

8 — Every tier priced publicly with credits per data type, credit expiry and rollover, per-seat costs, overage rates, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.

10 — Complete price computability: the annual invoice derivable for a given number of seats, exported contacts by data type, identified companies and API calls, with every credit cost and the refund rule for inaccurate data published.

Report an error

The RevOps Manager

Credit allowances per plan, what credits are spent on, unlimited users on all plans, add-on prices from 10€/month for additional email accounts and from 5.22€/mo for custom domains, VAT-excluded pricing and a 30% yearly discount are public. But we found no public information on the paid plans' monthly or yearly prices, and the captured pricing page gives different figures for the free plan's monthly credit allowance (50 versus 600). With credit expiry, rollover and overage rates also unstated, the real annual invoice is not computable from what was captured. 2 4

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

Ownership Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error

Where this could be wrong

What we left out

A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.

Do you know more about Hunter? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (11)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor homepage hunter.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing page hunter.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy hunter.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Terms of service hunter.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Security / trust page hunter.io Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Coverage, accuracy & freshness — found from sitemap hunter.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Coverage, accuracy & freshness — found from sitemap hunter.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Data sources & lawful basis — found from sitemap hunter.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Data sources & lawful basis — found from sitemap hunter.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap hunter.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap hunter.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →