Concept Outbound vs. Apollo.io
Apollo gives you a list. We give you a system. Single-source data means about 40-50% coverage. An enrichment waterfall pulls from multiple providers so each one fills the gaps the others miss. That's how you get 70%+ fill rates instead of 40%.
Apollo gets you started. Then you hit a wall.
Apollo is affordable and easy to use. $59 per user per month, 275M+ contacts, built-in sequencing. For a team getting started with outbound, it checks a lot of boxes.
Here's where it breaks down. You pull a list, load it into a sequence, and start sending. Response rates are low but you figure that's normal. So you pull a bigger list and send more.
The problem isn't volume. It's that everyone has Apollo. Your prospects get Apollo-sourced emails every day. Same data, similar AI-generated messaging, same cadences. You're not standing out because you're using the same tool as everyone else reaching the same people.
And Apollo's data is single-source. That means about 40-50% of the fields in your target accounts are blank or outdated. You can't build precise targeting on incomplete data.
What changes with multi-source enrichment
Instead of one database, an enrichment waterfall runs your records through 10+ providers in sequence. Apollo might have the email, Cognism has the European mobile, a technographic provider fills the tech stack, and a firmographic provider catches the company details Apollo missed.
Now you've got 70%+ of fields filled. And because the data is richer, you can build precise targeting. Not just "companies with 50-200 employees" but "companies running HubSpot that hired a VP Sales in the last 90 days and are in a buying cycle for outbound tools."
That specificity changes everything. The messaging writes itself because you know exactly why you're reaching out. The reply rates go up because the timing and relevance are there. And you're not competing with the 10 other people who pulled the same Apollo list this week.
Side-by-side comparison
| Apollo.io | Concept Outbound | |
|---|---|---|
| Data sources | Single source (Apollo) | 10+ providers via enrichment waterfall |
| Fill rate | 40-50% typical | 70%+ across all fields |
| Pricing model | $59/user/month (ongoing) | Per-record project pricing |
| Email sending | Shared infrastructure | Dedicated infrastructure with ~95% inbox rate |
| Messaging | AI-generated templates | Human-written, signal-specific sequences |
| Targeting strategy | Filters and saved searches | ICP validation + signal-based playbooks |
| CRM write-back | Basic sync | Direct API write-back to D365, Salesforce, HubSpot |
| Competitive moat | Same tool your competitors use | Proprietary data stack + methodology |
When Apollo is the right tool
Apollo works well for early-stage teams where one person is doing prospecting, sequencing, and calling from a single tool. The all-in-one model makes sense when you don't have dedicated ops or budget for separate tools.
It also works if your market is North America-heavy and your ICP is broad enough that 40-50% data coverage is workable.
But if you're running into low reply rates, your targeting feels generic, or you've outgrown the all-in-one model and need a purpose-built data and targeting layer, that's the point where single-source data stops being enough.
Common questions
Can you work alongside Apollo?
Yes. Some clients keep Apollo for their SDRs to do quick lookups and individual prospecting, and use us for bulk enrichment and campaign strategy. The tools solve different problems.
Is Apollo good enough for small teams?
For early-stage teams with fewer than 1,000 target accounts, Apollo is a reasonable starting point. It gives you a database and basic sequencing in one tool. But once you start hitting low reply rates or running out of accounts to contact, the limitations of single-source data become obvious.
How do your fill rates compare to Apollo?
Apollo alone typically covers 40-50% of fields depending on your target market and geography. An enrichment waterfall using 10+ sources (including Apollo where it adds value) consistently hits 70%+. The difference is compounding. Each source fills what the previous one missed.
Does Apollo have better email deliverability?
Apollo has a built-in email sending tool. But sending from Apollo means you're sending from the same infrastructure as thousands of other users. We set up dedicated sending infrastructure with SPF, DKIM, DMARC, domain warmup, and weekly seed testing. That's how you get about 95% inbox placement instead of hoping for the best.
What about Apollo's AI features?
Apollo has added AI-generated emails and scoring. The problem is everyone using Apollo gets similar AI outputs. Your prospects receive multiple Apollo-generated emails a day. We write messaging by hand, specific to the signal that put the person on the list. That's not a scalability problem. It's a positioning choice.
Do I need to buy Apollo first before working with you?
No. We use our own data provider stack. Apollo is one possible source in the enrichment waterfall, but we don't require clients to have any specific tool subscription. We bring the data infrastructure.
The full stack
See the difference richer data makes
Free audit. 30 minutes. We'll show you what's in your CRM, what Apollo is missing, and what multi-source enrichment could unlock for your pipeline.