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.
The Skeptic
A 200M+ leads headline with real-time email verification standing behind the 95% accuracy claim, and firmographics go well past name and domain with fifty-plus filters and 16K+ technology data points. But we found no public information on per-country coverage — nothing on DACH or EU volumes — and no refresh cadence; "ranked by freshness" is the only statement about the age of records, and the bounce refund is a one-line promise with no published terms. 1 2