whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Lead Generation

SalesIntel

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 1 of 6 dimensions proven

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

by SalesIntel, Inc. · www.salesintel.io

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

SalesIntel: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai SalesIntel: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds. The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.

SalesIntel at a glance

Vendor
SalesIntel, Inc.
Headquarters
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
Data hosting
Outside the EU by default source, captured 3 Nov 2026
Free plan
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates SalesIntel 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. SalesIntel, a lead generation vendor, scored highest on visitor identification, CRM sync and export, and data coverage, all ranging 4 to 6. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 3 Nov 2026. all sources

SalesIntel alternatives, European ones first →

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

Panel median The RevOps Manager This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The RevOps Manager
Coverage, accuracy & freshness 2.5 of 5 2.5 of 5
Data sources & lawful basis 2 of 5 2 of 5
Visitor identification & intent signals 2.5 of 5 3 of 5
Prospecting workflow & outreach rules 2 of 5 2 of 5
CRM sync, enrichment & export 2.5 of 5 2.5 of 5
European sovereignty 1.5 of 5 1.5 of 5

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 — Not a data product: the tool supplies no contact or company data and only manages leads the customer brings.

3 — Total record counts for the database with the data types offered (email, phone, company data) and email verification mentioned.

5 — Coverage stated by country or region with Europe or DACH included, email verification described, firmographics beyond name and domain (industry, size, revenue), and a refresh cadence or last-verified date stated.

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

Coverage is stated at region level with EMEA included, on 200 million-plus contacts and 54 million-plus verified mobile numbers, and the verification story is real: human and AI verification on a 90-day cycle at a claimed 95% accuracy with firmographic and technographic fields. But there is no per-country breakdown, the privacy policy says the Leads database profiles decision makers based in the United States, and I found no bounce or credit-back guarantee making inaccuracy the vendor's cost. 1 2 3 5 7 9

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 — The vendor states that it leaves the legal basis for the personal data it sells entirely to the buyer, or that records are collected without the people in them being able to object.

3 — Sources described in general terms (public sources, partners), a GDPR legal basis named, and an opt-out or removal route for people in the database.

5 — Source categories named (registers, company websites, contributory networks, licensed partners), legitimate interest under Art. 6(1)(f) stated as the basis for EU records, a privacy notice addressed to 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 only in general terms — researchers on the web plus a proprietary feed — with legitimate interest listed among several legal bases and a self-service opt-out where people can view, hide, delete or correct their record. I found no Art. 14 notification practice, no published balancing test, and no per-record traceability of source or collection date. That's enough for initial due diligence, thin for a European data-protection review. 2 5 8

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; the product does not look at website visits.

3 — Reverse-IP identification of the companies behind website visits through a tracking script, with visits listed per company.

5 — Company-level identification with filters and visit history per company, alerts or CRM handover of identified companies, and a stated position on consent for the script or a consent-mode option.

8 — Company-level only for EU traffic by design, cookieless operation documented, integration with common consent management platforms and the §25 TDDDG position stated, 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

VisitorIntel matches IP and behavioral signals against a company database and explicitly identifies companies rather than individuals, with real-time alerts, routing rules by territory and account tier, CRM writeback, and a named third-party intent source in Bombora across 60,000-plus topics. But I found no public position on consent for the tracking script under §25 TDDDG, no cookieless claim, and no consent-management-platform integration. Strong capability, silent on exactly the part a DPO will ask about. 1 7

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 — No search, list building or outreach; the product only stores leads entered or captured elsewhere.

3 — Search with filters on firmographics and job title, saved lists, and export of the contacts found.

5 — Advanced filters (technographics, hiring or funding triggers), saved searches with alerts, a suppression or do-not-contact list, and guidance on GDPR or cold-outreach rules for EU contacts.

8 — Country-aware handling (for example German contacts flagged where cold calls and emails require consent under UWG §7), 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 with detailed filters, list building, export through the API, and trigger-level filters such as technographics and funding or hiring signals are all documented. I found no suppression or do-not-contact list for buyers, no guidance on GDPR or cold-outreach rules for EU contacts, and nothing country-aware such as flagging German contacts under UWG §7. The legal risk of outreach sits with the customer, not the workflow. 1 4 8 9

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 — Data can only be viewed inside the product; the vendor states no export and no integration.

3 — CSV export and a push of contacts to at least one named CRM.

5 — Native integrations with the major CRMs (Salesforce, HubSpot or similar) with field mapping or deduplication, enrichment of existing CRM records, and a documented API.

8 — Bidirectional sync with scheduled re-enrichment, update and deletion propagated when a record changes or a person objects, webhook or API access with stated limits and 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

Native integrations with Salesforce, HubSpot and Marketo, a documented RESTful API with webhooks, contact and company append endpoints, and real-time writeback of visitor activity to CRM account records — this is a genuine integration story, not a CSV handoff. What I look for and did not find: field mapping or deduplication, bidirectional sync or scheduled re-enrichment, objections propagated into synced records, and stated exit terms for exported data and access when the subscription ends. 1 7 9 10

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 — Vendor, contracting entity and processing of EU residents' contact data all shown to be outside the EU, with no transfer basis stated.

3 — A named contracting entity and a privacy policy or data processing agreement; a non-EU entity with an EU representative under Art. 27, or EU hosting offered while the hosting location of the database is not stated.

5 — EU hosting stated as standard, together with an EU contracting entity or a published subprocessor list, and a data processing agreement offered.

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

The contracting entity is SalesIntel Research, Inc., a Delaware corporation that describes itself as a US company governed by US law, with personal information possibly stored and processed on servers in the United States; the transfer basis claimed is the EU-US Data Privacy Framework plus Standard Contractual Clauses, and named processors span the EU and US. I found no EU hosting, no data processing agreement documented, and no EU representative named. A US stack with framework-based transfers, not European sovereignty. 2

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

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 public "from" price, a free tier or one priced tier, while what a credit buys or the other tiers are not stated.

5 — Prices public per tier with the billing period and the credits or contacts included per tier; extras such as mobile numbers, additional seats or API access may still be on request.

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

The pricing model is described as one flat fee with unlimited data and no credit counting, but I found no public prices on any captured page — tier rates are contract-based, and the free trial and free Chrome extension don't let me compute an annual cost. A flat-fee promise is refreshing in a category that invents billing units, but without a number it is still a sales conversation. 1 6 7

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 of 6 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.

Hosting location Outside the EU ⚠ unverified 0/4 pts 2 Report an error
Hosting options Not determined — uncited Report an error
Open source Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data processing agreement Not determined — uncited Report an error
Transfer impact assessment Not determined — uncited Report an error

Questions about SalesIntel

Is SalesIntel European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where SalesIntel is based.

Where does SalesIntel store data?

SalesIntel stores customer data outside the EU by default, per the vendor’s page captured 3 Nov 2026.

Does SalesIntel have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to SalesIntel?

As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Cognism (3/5), Dealfront (3/5) and Vainu (3/5) highest among the other 40 Lead Generation products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Cognism (UK / wider Europe). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: SalesIntel alternatives.

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 SalesIntel? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (10)

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

  1. 1 Vendor page www.salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Privacy policy — found from the homepage salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Coverage, accuracy & freshness — found from sitemap salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Coverage, accuracy & freshness — found from sitemap salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Data sources & lawful basis — found from sitemap salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Data sources & lawful basis — found from sitemap developer.salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Visitor identification & intent signals — found from sitemap salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Prospecting workflow & outreach rules — found from sitemap salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  9. 9 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  10. 10 CRM sync, enrichment & export — found from sitemap salesintel.io Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →