Hunter.io vs Lusha
The closest pair in the lead-generation category: both are focused contact-data tools, both have real free tiers, both sit around $49. The deciding factor is almost always seats — and the two take opposite approaches.
Hunter.io
Email finding and verification with a genuinely usable free tier.
Lusha
B2B contact data with a real free tier, priced per credit rather than per lookup.
| Feature | Hunter.io | Lusha |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.4 | 4.2 |
| Starting price | $49/momonthly billing; $34/mo billed yearly | $49.9/momonthly billing; $37.45/mo billed yearly |
| Free trial | Yes | Yes |
| Free tier | 50 credits/month | 40 credits/month, no card |
| Credits | 2,000 (Starter) → 25,000 (Scale) | Starter 400/mo monthly or 4,800/yr yearly → Premium 3,400/mo or 40,800/yr |
| Team members | Unlimited, all plans | — |
| Email verification | Included | — |
| Email accounts | 1 connected (free tier) | — |
| Seats included | — | 1 (Starter) → 5 (Premium) |
| Credit delivery | — | Monthly on monthly billing; upfront on yearly |
Hands-on field test
In progressFor lead-data tools we plan to run a fixed list of 200 known-good contacts through each product and measure match rate, bounce rate on verified addresses, and cost per valid contact. Until measured, we publish no accuracy figures.
The verdict
Hunter is the better buy for teams because team members are unlimited on every plan and share one credit pool, so a five-person team pays the same as one person. Lusha includes a fixed number of seats per tier — one on Starter, five on Premium — so headcount pushes you up the pricing ladder. Lusha's counter is a free tier that needs no credit card, plus the option of a whole year's credits granted upfront on yearly billing. For an individual it is close; for a team Hunter's model wins.
Choose Hunter.io if you have a team of any size — unlimited seats sharing one credit pool is the structural advantage. Choose Lusha if you are one or two people, your prospecting is steady, and you would rather take a year's credits upfront.
Hunter.io vs Lusha: FAQs
- Which is better value for a team?
- Hunter, clearly. Unlimited team members on every plan share one credit pool, so cost does not scale with headcount. Lusha includes 1 seat on Starter and 5 on Premium, so a growing team has to move up tiers.
- How do the free tiers compare?
- Hunter gives 50 credits a month with no time limit. Lusha gives 40 credits a month with no credit card. Both are genuinely usable for evaluating coverage on your own market.
- How are credits counted?
- Hunter's are monthly and shared across the account, and both finding and verifying consume them. Lusha's depend on the billing basis: 400 a month on monthly Starter, or 4,800 granted upfront on yearly — which suits steady usage and punishes spiky months.
- What do the prices look like?
- Hunter's Starter is $49/mo on monthly billing, dropping to $34/mo billed yearly. Lusha's Starter is $49.90/mo monthly or $37.45/mo yearly. They are level on monthly billing, and Hunter is slightly cheaper if you commit annually.
Comparing more than two?
Put Hunter.io, Lusha and up to two others side by side on price, mailboxes, warmup and trials.
Open the comparison table →