Jorge LewisDisclosure: GTM Bud is our product. We include it alongside competitors to give you a complete picture, and we call out its limitations honestly.
Kaspr vs Lusha is the closest thing this category has to a mirror match: two browser extensions that reveal emails and phone numbers while you browse LinkedIn, both priced per seat in the same double-digit range, both aimed at small teams rather than enterprise buyers. The real split is not the feature list. It is geography and scope: Kaspr is a Cognism-owned, extension-first tool with its center of gravity in Europe, and Lusha is a broader, US-leaning platform where the extension sits on top of a standalone database. Pick by the map your pipeline lives on, and the decision mostly makes itself.
We test contact data the expensive way. Our parent agency, Referral Program Pros, has run more than 4,000 outbound campaigns and booked over 7,000 meetings for clients, and we built GTM Bud on that same agency playbook, backed by a reply-rate guarantee of 5 percent positive replies on LinkedIn or 1.5 percent on email, or a full refund. A guarantee like that only survives when contact data holds up in live campaigns, so this comparison scores Kaspr and Lusha against what actually breaks in practice, not against each other’s marketing pages.
The short answer
Pick Kaspr if you sell into Europe. It is built GDPR-first under Cognism, which acquired it in April 2022, its coverage concentrates in European markets, and its paid plans remove the credit meter on B2B emails entirely, per third-party 2026 pricing guides from Landbase and Leadhaste. Pick Lusha if you sell into North America and want more than a lookup extension: Zeliq’s 2026 head-to-head scores Lusha ahead for US outbound, direct-dial coverage, bulk CSV enrichment, and CRM and API depth, though Zeliq sells a competing product, so weigh the source. On price the two overlap heavily, with Kaspr reported at $49 to $99 per user per month and Lusha’s entry sticker disputed between $29 and roughly $50 across named 2026 guides. What neither price buys is execution: both tools hand you contacts and leave the targeting, copywriting, sending, and follow-up entirely on your side.
Kaspr vs Lusha at a glance
Every figure in this table is attributed, and every disagreement between sources flagged, in the sections below.
| Dimension | Kaspr | Lusha |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Extension-first lookup tool, LinkedIn-native | Database plus extension, broader platform |
| Ownership | Cognism, since April 2022 | Independent |
| Reported entry price | $49 to $99 per user/mo, per Landbase and Leadhaste | Sticker disputed: $29, about $37, or about $50, see below |
| Credit cost of an email | Unlimited B2B emails on paid plans | 1 credit, per Zeliq’s 2026 guide |
| Credit cost of a phone reveal | Metered phone credits on every tier | Reported at 5 to 10 credits; sources disagree, see below |
| Regional strength | Europe, per Zeliq’s 2026 comparison | North America, per the same comparison |
| Marketed database | 500M+ emails and phone numbers, vendor claim | 290M+ contacts, vendor claim |
| Native LinkedIn sending | Light workflow automation, invitations and messages | No, lookup and enrichment only |
| Who finds leads and writes copy | You | You |
The last row is shared, and it decides more pipelines than everything above it. Hold that thought for the ending.
How do Kaspr and Lusha pricing actually compare?
Kaspr is the more legible sticker. Third-party 2026 pricing guides from Landbase and Leadhaste list a free tier plus paid plans starting around $49 per user per month, rising to a Business tier around $99, with unlimited B2B email reveals on paid plans. The free tier is genuinely usable for testing: Kaspr’s published plan documentation grants 5 phone credits, 5 direct email credits, and 10 export credits per month alongside unlimited B2B emails, which is enough to audit data quality in your segment before paying.
Lusha’s entry sticker is murkier. Paid plans start around $37 per user per month on annual billing, per 2026 pricing reviews from Cognism and Cleanlist, though Zeliq’s July 2026 breakdown notes those entry figures are promotional, with non-promotional list prices closer to $50, and Cleanlist’s own March 2026 pricing guide advertises an entry sticker of $29 per user. When three named sources land at $29, $37, and $50 for the same tier, the honest read is that Lusha’s entry price moves with promotions, so trust your checkout page over any guide, ours included.
One provenance note you should not skip: one of the sources reporting Lusha’s price is Cognism, which owns Kaspr and therefore competes with Lusha directly. That pattern runs through this whole category. Much of the detailed Kaspr and Lusha coverage on the web is published by rival vendors, Zeliq, FullEnrich, and Cognism among them, so treat their figures as consistent estimates from motivated observers, and read our full Lusha vs Apollo comparison for how the same pricing conflicts play out against a bigger opponent.
Two credit meters, and one of them has an escape hatch
Both tools meter data access in credits, but they meter different things, and that difference is the sharpest practical gap between them. Lusha meters everything: a verified email costs 1 credit and a phone reveal roughly five, per Zeliq’s 2026 pricing guide, while Lusha’s own help-center documentation now lists a phone number at 10 credits, a gap Linkedhelper’s 2026 review attributes to differences between plan versions. On expiry, MarketBetter’s 2026 review reports that annual plans reset unused credits at renewal, and Lusha’s billing documentation confirms the annual reset while describing monthly plans as rolling unused credits forward up to twice the monthly allocation.
Kaspr keeps a meter too, but only on part of the catalog. B2B email reveals are unlimited on paid plans, per Landbase and Leadhaste, while phone numbers, personal direct emails, and exports still draw from monthly credit allocations on every tier. So the structural comparison lands like this: for an email-led motion, Kaspr removes the credit math entirely, and for a phone-led motion, both vendors still charge per reveal, with Lusha’s phone cost running five to ten times its email cost depending on which plan version you are on. If escaping credit mechanics is the whole reason you are reading this, our Lusha alternatives roundup maps every exit from the meter, Kaspr included.
Where is each database actually strong?
Geography first, because it is the cleanest dividing line. Zeliq’s 2026 head-to-head scores Kaspr ahead for European-market outreach, LinkedIn-native workflows, and GDPR-sensitive contexts, and Lusha ahead for North American outbound, direct-dial phone coverage, large-scale CSV enrichment, and teams with deeper CRM or API needs. That split matches the companies’ origins: Kaspr was founded in France and built its coverage outward from European markets under Cognism’s GDPR-first umbrella, while Lusha’s platform reviews consistently describe its strongest coverage in the US. Remember the caveat that applies to nearly every source in this section: Zeliq sells a competing product, so its rankings are directional evidence, not a neutral audit.
Scope is the second split. Kaspr is extension-first: a Chrome extension that reveals contact data on LinkedIn, Sales Navigator, and Recruiter Lite profiles, with a dashboard and light LinkedIn workflow automation behind it. Lusha is a database with an extension attached: alongside the browser tool sits a standalone prospecting platform that 2026 reviews such as Amplemarket’s describe expanding into email sequencing, buying signals, and AI-driven recommendations, with Amplemarket itself being another competing vendor writing about a rival. On marketed scale, Kaspr claims a database of more than 500 million email addresses and phone numbers, and Lusha markets more than 290 million contacts. Both are vendor claims, not audited counts.
Accuracy deserves its own warning label. Vendor-claimed accuracy percentages circulate through nearly every Kaspr vs Lusha comparison, and the pages cannot even agree on the numbers: FullEnrich’s comparison lists Lusha claiming 95 percent accuracy against Kaspr’s 92, while Listar’s 2026 write-up puts both vendors’ announced rates between 87 and 93 percent depending on geography, and write-ups relay Kaspr’s real-time verification as checking about 120 sources in some versions and more than 150 in others. Every one of those numbers is self-reported by a vendor and repeated by its rivals, and no independent audit of either database exists. Treat them all as marketing, and judge accuracy the only way that matters: run a sample of your own ideal customer profile through each free tier and measure the bounce rate. Our B2B data providers compared guide covers how to run that test across the whole category.
Which should you pick for your motion?
Selling into Europe, pick Kaspr. You get the GDPR-native posture inherited from Cognism, coverage concentrated where your prospects are, and unlimited B2B email reveals that end the credit arithmetic for an email-led workflow. Selling into North America, pick Lusha: the reported US coverage edge, the bulk enrichment, and the platform depth all point that way, and its disputed entry sticker of $29 to $50 keeps the trial cheap. Selling into both, run the 100-contact test in each region before deciding, because neither vendor’s marketing will volunteer where its own coverage thins out.
Then apply the caveat that outranks the whole comparison: whichever extension wins, verify before you send. Self-reported accuracy in the 87 to 95 percent range, per the vendor claims relayed by FullEnrich and Listar, still means real bounces on real campaigns, and a bounced email costs sender reputation that no refunded credit restores. Based on data from over 4,000 outbound campaigns run by our parent agency, Referral Program Pros, targeting and message quality move reply rates far more than the marginal accuracy difference between two lookup tools, which is why the next section matters more than this one.
What neither extension puts on the table
Here is the part the versus framing hides: a contact reveal is the cheapest step in outbound. Whichever tool you install, someone still has to define an ideal customer profile tight enough to be worth prospecting, build and dedupe the list, verify the reveals, write messages that earn replies, warm the sending accounts, send across LinkedIn and email, and chase follow-ups for weeks. Kaspr’s light LinkedIn automation sends invitations you configure; Lusha sends nothing. Neither researches prospects for you, and neither writes a word of copy. Buying either one gets you raw material, and raw material books zero meetings on its own.
For a small team, that gap is usually the real constraint, and it is the situation done-for-you outbound exists for. GTM Bud inverts the purchase: you define your ideal customer profile, and the platform researches matching prospects, sources and verifies contact data as part of each campaign, writes personalized messages from the playbooks our agency uses daily, and runs coordinated LinkedIn and email sequences through to booked meetings. LinkedIn pricing is $500 per month per connected LinkedIn account, including 1,000 leads per month, with a 7-day trial, and every campaign carries the guarantee: 5 percent positive replies on LinkedIn or 1.5 percent on email, or a full refund. The honest limitation is the mirror image of both extensions: there is no database to browse and no export button, so if raw lists for cold calling or CRM enrichment are the requirement, Kaspr or Lusha serves you better. If the requirement is automated lead generation that ends in meetings, a lookup extension was never going to be enough.
Frequently asked questions about Kaspr vs Lusha
Is Kaspr owned by Cognism?
Yes. Cognism, the enterprise GDPR-first data platform, acquired Kaspr in April 2022, and Kaspr operates as its self-serve, SMB-shaped product. That ownership explains the positioning: Kaspr inherits the European compliance posture and EU data investment without the enterprise contract, and teams that outgrow the extension can move up to Cognism without changing data families. Lusha, by contrast, is an independent company with its own database and platform.
Does Kaspr really offer unlimited email reveals?
For B2B emails, yes. Third-party 2026 pricing guides from Landbase and Leadhaste list unlimited B2B email reveals on Kaspr paid plans, and its published plan documentation extends unlimited B2B emails to the free tier too. The meter does not disappear entirely: phone numbers, personal direct emails, and exports still consume monthly credits on every tier. Unlimited also does not mean verified for your use, so run reveals through a verification pass before anything sends.
Which is better for prospecting in the US, Kaspr or Lusha?
Lusha, according to the third-party comparisons available in 2026. Zeliq scores Lusha ahead for North American outbound and direct-dial coverage, while Kaspr, founded in France, concentrates its coverage in European markets, a pattern Kaspr’s G2 reviews echo in user reports of thinner data outside Europe. Zeliq sells a competing product, so treat the ranking as directional and run both free tiers against 100 contacts in your own segment before paying either vendor.
Are Kaspr and Lusha both GDPR compliant?
Both publish compliance frameworks, and Kaspr goes further: it is built GDPR-first under Cognism ownership with transparent opt-out handling, while third-party comparisons describe Lusha as GDPR-aware. The caveat applies to every data vendor: under GDPR the provider is a processor and you are the data controller, so your lawful basis, your opt-out process, and your documentation remain your responsibility whichever extension you install.
Do Kaspr or Lusha run LinkedIn outreach campaigns for you?
Not in any complete sense. Third-party 2026 comparisons note that Kaspr bundles light LinkedIn workflow automation, such as timed invitations and messages, while Lusha does not send outreach on any channel. Neither tool researches your ideal prospects, writes personalized copy, or manages multi-week follow-up across LinkedIn and email. If booked meetings are the goal rather than a contact export, an AI SDR for small business like GTM Bud sources and verifies the data inside each campaign and runs the outreach end to end.
Pick the map, then question the job
The Kaspr vs Lusha decision is a geography call wearing a feature comparison’s clothes. European pipeline points to Kaspr: GDPR-native under Cognism, unlimited B2B email reveals per Landbase and Leadhaste, and coverage built outward from France. North American pipeline points to Lusha: the US edge and platform depth that Zeliq’s comparison reports, at a disputed but consistently low entry sticker. Ignore every self-reported accuracy percentage on both sides, because no independent audit backs any of them, and Lusha’s G2 reviews show the same stale-data complaints that follow every vendor in this category.
Then ask the question neither vendor page will: who is going to run the outreach? Both tools end at the reveal, and everything between a revealed contact and a booked meeting stays your unpaid work. If that work is the actual bottleneck, put the seat budget on the outcome instead. Start a campaign with GTM Bud: prospect research, verified contact data, personalized copy, and coordinated LinkedIn and email sending in one flat rate of $500 per month per LinkedIn account with 1,000 leads included, a 7-day trial, and a reply-rate guarantee of 5 percent positive replies on LinkedIn or 1.5 percent on email, or a full refund.