Content
Most enrichment tools perform well when the input is perfect — freshly exported from LinkedIn, complete, standardized, and less than a week old.
But that’s rarely the reality of a CRM.
Your contacts are often:
- 6 to 12 months old
- missing LinkedIn URLs
- outdated (job/company changes)
- inconsistent or partially filled
This benchmark focuses exactly on real CRM data from + 10 agencies, not ideal scenarios.
Global Results (All Leads Combined)
Across all 567 leads, Pronto leads FullEnrich by +11 points in valid email coverage.
Key Finding
On fresh data, both tools perform equally well.
But on real CRM data (6–12 months old), Pronto outperforms by +18 points.
This gap is the reason GTMs teams switch to Pronto.
Country Breakdown
Insight
The uplift is consistent across all geographies — not tied to one country or dataset.
Company Size Breakdown
Takeaway
Pronto is particularly strong on companies 11–500 employees, where job turnover is highest.
Industry Breakdown
Highlight
In industries with strong job turnover (Accommodation, Logistics), Pronto’s lead is massive.
Benchmark Dataset Overview
We enriched a total of 567 B2B leads, here is the exact repartition:
Why Pronto Performs Better on CRM Data
Most enrichment solutions depend heavily on:
- the original LinkedIn URL
- static databases
- outdated identity records
But when your CRM is old, these inputs are unreliable.
Pronto takes a different approach:
It re-fetches the latest LinkedIn data in real time for every lookup.
This ensures:
- updated job titles
- updated companies
- corrected or recovered LinkedIn URLs
- accurate live profiles
- instant, real-time debounce
🔵 Tip
If you enrich old CRM data with a tool that doesn’t refresh LinkedIn first…
you’re enriching ghosts (old jobs, old companies, dead emails).
Methodology (Transparent & Reproducible)
We want this benchmark to be fully verifiable, not a marketing story.
Here’s exactly how we built it.
1. Lead Collection
- 567 B2B leads from LinkedIn
- Fresh leads: first search results across industries/countries
- Aged leads: older CRM-type entries
- Balanced mix of size, industry, geography
- Only 48% had LinkedIn URLs
2. Identical Input File
Each tool received the exact same file, containing:
- name, surname
- job title
- company
- country
- company size
- industry
- data age
- LinkedIn URL (when available)
3. Waterfall Enrichment
For each tool:
- input uploaded
- waterfall activated
- email results collected
- debounce applied
- results exported
4. Measuring Valid Coverage
Coverage = valid + deliverable emails only.
We computed coverage:
- globally
- by country
- by industry
- by company size
- by data freshness
5. Output Files (Verification)
We provide:
- the raw input file
- the full enrichment results for each tool
- the pivot summary used to build the charts
You can manually recalculate every number.
Final Conclusion
If your data is fresh, clean, and complete → most enrichment tools will do fine.
But if your CRM contains old leads (which is true for every company):
- missing LinkedIn URLs
- outdated job titles
- job/company changes
- inconsistent or partial fields
Then the benchmark is clear:
Pronto is the best waterfall enrichment tool for real-world CRM data.
82% vs 71% global coverage.
+18 points on aged leads.
Stop hunting like a kitten.
Leverage the knowledge of +30 Growth & Sales experts
