PersistData vs Lusha

Lusha is a brand-name, extension-first prospecting tool sold per seat. PersistData is metered data without the seat.

A side-by-side look at how the two compare, and which one fits your use case.

DimensionPersistDataLusha
Data modelServer-side data APIOwned, crowdsourced database (Lusha markets 300M+ contacts, 152M+ emails, 30M+ companies). Lusha states it does not scrape LinkedIn; sourced from its Community Program, public records, partnerships, and verification
Login / seat requiredNo login, no seat, no extensionYes for the core product; per-seat Chrome extension + web app. API exists (Pro tier and up) but is metered against the same per-seat credit pool
LinkedIn account ban riskNone; fully server-sideLow-to-none for your LinkedIn account; Lusha serves its own database and states it does not scrape LinkedIn, so the extension does not query LinkedIn on your behalf (parity with PersistData). The relevant Lusha risk is data accuracy and credit waste
Pricing modelOne-time packs or month-to-month, transparent per-credit (PersistData's published terms)Per-seat. Free ($0, 40 credits/mo, 1 seat); Starter ~$44.95/user/mo annual; Professional ~$67.45/user/mo annual; Premium ~$299.95/mo annual; Scale/Enterprise custom (Vendr reports ~$37,482/yr list for 25 seats, typically discounted)
Approx. $ per record~$0.02-$0.10 per credit; verified email = 5 credits (PersistData's stated rates)~$0.09 per credit on annual plans; email reveal = 1 credit (~$0.09). Phone reveal = 10 credits via web (~$0.90 each); some Lusha docs reference a 5-credit API rate, but the official pricing page lists 10 credits and does not differentiate web vs API (verify current rate). Billed per seat on top
Pay only for foundYes; a not-found costs 0 credits (per PersistData's terms)No; credits are consumed on reveal regardless of whether the data is valid or deliverable. Reviews specifically cite credits burned on stale phone numbers and bounced emails
Free tierEvaluation via low-cost packsYes; genuinely free tier at $0/mo with 40 credits/month, 1 seat (official figure). Good for evaluation, small for real volume
Annual lock-inNoneEffectively yes for annual plans; non-refundable with no proration for mid-cycle cancellation. Unused annual credits expire and do not roll over (monthly plans roll over up to 2x)
API accessAPI-first; clean server-side productYes (REST API: Enrichment, Prospecting, Signals, Lookalike; bulk up to 100 records/request). Gated to higher tiers and metered against the same per-seat credit pool, so it is not a clean seat-free data layer

What Lusha is great at

Lusha is a polished, brand-recognized prospecting tool: a large owned database (Lusha markets 300M+ contacts), a smooth Chrome-extension-first workflow over LinkedIn, native CRM integrations (Salesforce, HubSpot), buying-signals/intent data, and a deep compliance stack (GDPR, CCPA, SOC 2 Type II, multiple ISO certs, TRUSTe). Lusha advertises ~98% email accuracy (vendor claim; independent results vary), and it has an established G2 presence (approximately 4.3/5 from ~1,400 reviews as of mid-2026).

Where PersistData fits instead

PersistData fits on the cost-and-access model, not database scale or brand. Pay-only-for-found means a miss costs 0 credits, where Lusha burns credits on stale or invalid reveals. There is no per-seat tax, no Chrome extension, and no minimum users, so cost does not multiply with headcount. One-time packs with no expiry or refund trap suit spiky, low-commitment usage, and the API is the core product rather than a higher-tier add-on bolted onto a seat-based SaaS.

Bottom line: Choose Lusha if you have named SDRs who want an out-of-the-box, browser-extension prospecting workflow on top of LinkedIn, plus CRM integration, intent signals, and a polished UI, and you are comfortable with per-seat pricing and annual commitment. For a turnkey seat-based tool with signals and integrations, Lusha is the more complete product.
Why teams choose us

Why PersistData

Request Access