Best Tools for List Building and Data Enrichment Explained

Vrinda G. · 2025-04-25 12:58:05.390764+00

I'm curious about the tools you're currently using for list building and data enrichment. Are you leveraging platforms like Clay, Zoominfo, Apollo, or Lusha, or perhaps other solutions? I'm also interested to know if anyone is using a research team for this process. I'd appreciate your perspective on the best approach to build customized, highly targeted lists for outbound efforts, specifically tailored to your Ideal Customer Profile (ICP).

Best Tools for List Building and Data Enrichment Explained | RevGenius

8 comments

· Sorted by Oldest

Guilherme P.
·
·
Clay is not bad but you'll burn through your credits very quick and it will become quite expensive. Apollo's data quality is not amazing and ZoomInfo/Lusha don't refresh their database frequently so you still get a high bounce rate. I'd suggest Amplemarket.com, it has great data quality.
Brandi S.
·
·
We've been using Lusha in a limited capacity for a few months. So far the data has been about 90% accurate. Two things that are annoying but not deal breakers 1) When you are filtering companies and using the technology or intent filters you can't then overlay contacts. You have to take the company names as a filter on the contacts. 2) when you push to Hubspot it just pushes them in. There is no option to automatically add them to a list or anything. I have to then go into Hubspot and put them on a list to trigger workflows. We are on the cheapest plan so these may be limitations of what level we have.
Imran P.
·
·
This is my flow: build a list of target companies based on different criteria from Apollo or builtwith. Import into clay for enrichment or qualification if needed. Export the company list to Apollo and get contacts (their contact database is better). Reimport them into clay and do some qualification and then outbound.
Imran P.
·
·
Ofc and we use our product when the list is based on website visitors or LinkedIn engagers - it does all of the above in one shot.
Nico G.
·
·
Hey Vrinda G., Yeah, we run this pretty heavily through Clay. It's less a data provider and more an orchestration engine for list building. We plug it into multiple data sources and set up a waterfall, so if one provider doesn’t have the info, it just pulls from the next. Helps keep the quality high and costs way lower than relying on just one platform like ZoomInfo or Apollo. We also layer OpenAI into the process, things like job scraping, profile summarising, ICP scoring - so we don’t really need manual research teams anymore. It’s all about building really tailored lists without the usual headache. Happy to chat more if you want to deep dive on setups, my engineering team has put together a framework that we leverage for most outbound motions at the moment.
Cassie M.
·
·
Hi from RevPartners! We see a lot of teams default to tools like ZoomInfo, Apollo, Lusha, etc. But the real difference isn’t which tool you use, it’s how you operationalize them around your ICP and outbound strategy. Here’s what we recommend for building customized, high-precision lists:
1.
Start with a Clear, Operational ICP
2.
Most teams define ICPs in theory but don’t translate that into actionable filters.
3.
Layer Tools for Better Accuracy
4.
We often see the best results by combining:
Clay for dynamic workflows and enrichment (we handle implementations & our Allbound product allows you to try Clay on a discount!)
ZoomInfo/Apollo for broad data coverage
LinkedIn + Intent Data for real-time signals
5.
Tools get you 80% there. For strategic accounts or ABM plays, a research layer (whether internal or outsourced) can massively improve relevance.
6.
List building isn’t a one-time task. Build processes to keep data fresh!!
If you’re looking to tighten alignment between your ICP, tech stack, and outbound plays, happy to swap notes. We (RevPartners) help teams design scalable, signal-based outbound engines that actually convert.
Hemant P.
·
·
Hi Vrinda G., A combination of tools is often leveraged for this purpose, like Apollo for volume, Clay for enrichment and workflows, and Clearbit for firmographic accuracy. And combining automation with human validation is key to ensuring relevance and personalization at scale.
1.
Start with a clear ICP definition
2.
Leverage tools to filter by firmographics and intent signals.
3.
Layer enrichment
4.
Add human research for nuances that automation can’t catch.
It’s all about quality > quantity to drive meaningful outbound. I hope that helps. If you are looking for solutions or any further help, kindly let me know. Thanks.
Bittu M.
·
·
I think you should just stick on Apollo + waterfall enrichment to get the data. Try theboomerang.co, for scale.

Guilherme P.
·
·
Clay is not bad but you'll burn through your credits very quick and it will become quite expensive. Apollo's data quality is not amazing and ZoomInfo/Lusha don't refresh their database frequently so you still get a high bounce rate. I'd suggest Amplemarket.com, it has great data quality.
Brandi S.
·
·
We've been using Lusha in a limited capacity for a few months. So far the data has been about 90% accurate. Two things that are annoying but not deal breakers 1) When you are filtering companies and using the technology or intent filters you can't then overlay contacts. You have to take the company names as a filter on the contacts. 2) when you push to Hubspot it just pushes them in. There is no option to automatically add them to a list or anything. I have to then go into Hubspot and put them on a list to trigger workflows. We are on the cheapest plan so these may be limitations of what level we have.
Imran P.
·
·
This is my flow: build a list of target companies based on different criteria from Apollo or builtwith. Import into clay for enrichment or qualification if needed. Export the company list to Apollo and get contacts (their contact database is better). Reimport them into clay and do some qualification and then outbound.
Imran P.
·
·
Ofc and we use our product when the list is based on website visitors or LinkedIn engagers - it does all of the above in one shot.
Nico G.
·
·
Hey Vrinda G., Yeah, we run this pretty heavily through Clay. It's less a data provider and more an orchestration engine for list building. We plug it into multiple data sources and set up a waterfall, so if one provider doesn’t have the info, it just pulls from the next. Helps keep the quality high and costs way lower than relying on just one platform like ZoomInfo or Apollo. We also layer OpenAI into the process, things like job scraping, profile summarising, ICP scoring - so we don’t really need manual research teams anymore. It’s all about building really tailored lists without the usual headache. Happy to chat more if you want to deep dive on setups, my engineering team has put together a framework that we leverage for most outbound motions at the moment.
Cassie M.
·
·
Hi from RevPartners! We see a lot of teams default to tools like ZoomInfo, Apollo, Lusha, etc. But the real difference isn’t which tool you use, it’s how you operationalize them around your ICP and outbound strategy. Here’s what we recommend for building customized, high-precision lists:
1.
Start with a Clear, Operational ICP
2.
Most teams define ICPs in theory but don’t translate that into actionable filters.
3.
Layer Tools for Better Accuracy
4.
We often see the best results by combining:
Clay for dynamic workflows and enrichment (we handle implementations & our Allbound product allows you to try Clay on a discount!)
ZoomInfo/Apollo for broad data coverage
LinkedIn + Intent Data for real-time signals
5.
Tools get you 80% there. For strategic accounts or ABM plays, a research layer (whether internal or outsourced) can massively improve relevance.
6.
List building isn’t a one-time task. Build processes to keep data fresh!!
If you’re looking to tighten alignment between your ICP, tech stack, and outbound plays, happy to swap notes. We (RevPartners) help teams design scalable, signal-based outbound engines that actually convert.
Hemant P.
·
·
Hi Vrinda G., A combination of tools is often leveraged for this purpose, like Apollo for volume, Clay for enrichment and workflows, and Clearbit for firmographic accuracy. And combining automation with human validation is key to ensuring relevance and personalization at scale.
1.
Start with a clear ICP definition
2.
Leverage tools to filter by firmographics and intent signals.
3.
Layer enrichment
4.
Add human research for nuances that automation can’t catch.
It’s all about quality > quantity to drive meaningful outbound. I hope that helps. If you are looking for solutions or any further help, kindly let me know. Thanks.
Bittu M.
·
·
I think you should just stick on Apollo + waterfall enrichment to get the data. Try theboomerang.co, for scale.