Apollo.io Reviews

1. michelleturner

   · Managing Director at Nuvoro Digital · 9 months ago
   Apollo for automated outreach

   We use Apollo with our Sales and BDR team to manage our cold outreach. The strength of the platform is the sequences and cadences that you can set up. Compared to other tools we have used in the past like Salesloft the UI is much easier to navigate. The main limitation is that the quality of data isn't as vast and often I can find prospects on Linkedin but not in Apollo.

   🏁 Competitors: SalesLoft

   👍 Pros:    Creating email sequences|Ab testing of emails|Good user experience

   👎 Cons:    Data quality is lacking sometimes|Onboardin process was cumbersome

BrowserStack Reviews

Apollo.io mentions (69)

• Enriching Free Trial Signups: The PLG Data Stack for Turning Inbound Users Into Qualified Pipeline

  Personal email domains destroy this. Clearbit's Enrichment API returns a null company when it hits gmail.com. Apollo routes personal domains straight to a consumer bucket and skips B2B fields entirely. Even PDL's /person/enrich endpoint — the most permissive of the major providers — gives you around 32% hit rate on Gmail addresses versus 74% on corporate domains. I measured this across 6,200 signups for a... - Source: dev.to / about 1 month ago

• Clearbit Is Now HubSpot-Only: A 1-to-1 API Migration Map for Teams Getting Locked Out

  A few things worth flagging: PDL beats Clearbit's historical rates for US and Western European companies, but drops to ~52% match rate for Japan and South Korea specifically. Apollo underperforms on raw company matching but returns significantly more contacts per domain in Prospector-style queries than Clearbit's Prospector ever did — the tradeoff is more stale titles in the result set. Hunter.io is fast and cheap... - Source: dev.to / about 1 month ago

• Auto-Enriching Your CRM on New Contact Creation: A No-Code Webhook Playbook

  One thing comparison guides consistently get wrong: Clay is not an enrichment API. It's a waterfall orchestration tool that calls People Data Labs, Apollo, Clearbit, and others in sequence for you. It's useful, but it adds 2–8 seconds of latency per row in my runs and costs more per match than going direct. For a CRM webhook flow where you need sub-second enrichment calls, Clay is the wrong layer to hit first. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

• How to Build an OSINT-Powered B2B Prospecting Workflow in 2026 (Without Getting Banned)

  Last year I ran the same LinkedIn Sales Navigator export through three enrichment APIs. Apollo matched 61% of the emails. Hunter.io matched 54%. An OSINT-first pipeline I'd built in n8n — pulling from public sources before hitting any paid API — matched 79% and cost roughly $0.003 per contact. The delta wasn't magic. It was sequence. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

• LinkedIn Scraping Is Dead: 5 Legal, ToS-Safe Alternatives That Actually Work in 2026

  Despite having its LinkedIn Page removed in 2025, Apollo remains a functional enrichment and outreach platform with 275M+ contacts. The free tier includes 10,000 credits and the $49/month basic plan is the cheapest entry point for a combined enrichment-plus-sequencing workflow. Apollo's data collection methods have attracted LinkedIn's attention, but the product continues to operate. The risk I'd assign it:... - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

BrowserStack mentions (8)

• Show HN: Quell – AI QA Agent Working Across Linear, Vercel, Jira, Netlify, Figma

  This is pretty cool - the Jira/Linear integration could save a ton of manual work. How do you handle test data setup and teardown? That's usually where these workflows get messy. For alternatives in this space, there's qawolf (https://qawolf.com) for similar automated testing workflows, or I'm actually building bug0 (https://bug0.com) which also does AI-powered test automation, still in beta. For the more... - Source: Hacker News / about 1 year ago

• 🛑 Stop resizing your browser: improve testing for responsiveness

  Platforms like Browserstack or SauceLabs offer virtual instances of real devices and browsers for manual and end-to-end testing. Caveat: subscriptions cost money and are on a per-seat basis. - Source: dev.to / about 2 years ago

• Unsupported country

  If you go to browserstack.com (a website to test other websites) you can probably to the chatgpt url and sign up there. Source: over 3 years ago

• Windows vs Mac?

  For testing on Mac or iOS, use browserstack.com, you'll spend considerably less using that than you would buying the actual hardware. Source: over 3 years ago

• Free methods for testing websites/apps across devices?

  I've seen subscription services such as browserstack.com and lambdatest.com but I believe they cost to get the full range of mac browsers and devices. Source: over 3 years ago