Clay vs Hunter
Clay vs Hunter, compared side by side on 20 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Clay is on 43/100 and Hunter on 62/100.
Where each one leads
Clay
- headcount: 1,242 against 36
- funding raised: $3.0B against $63.0M
- LinkedIn following: 158,260 against 12,262
Hunter
- our overall score: 62/100 against 43/100
At a glance
| Measure | Clay | Hunter |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Clay provides an AI-powered platform for go-to-market teams to automate data enrichment, lead generation, and personalized outreach, leveraging over 100 data sources to turn insights into revenue. | Hunter.io is an all-in-one email outreach platform that helps sales, marketing, and recruiting teams find and verify professional email addresses and automate cold email campaigns. |
| Category | MarTech, AdTech, Sales Enablement, Data Enrichment | Sales Technology, Marketing Technology, Data Enrichment, Lead Generation |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Software | Software |
| Founded | 2021 | 2015 |
| Headquarters | San Francisco, United States | Paris, France |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Clay | Hunter |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 1,242 | 36 |
| Total funding | $3.0B | $63.0M |
| Latest round | Seed | Series B |
| Valuation | Not published | $1.1B |
| LinkedIn followers | 158,260 | 12,262 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Clay | Hunter |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 43/100 | 62/100 |
| Traction | 60/100 | 55/100 |
| Team | 30/100 | 30/100 |
| Community | 8/100 | Not published |
| Search visibility | 75/100 | 22/100 |
| Quality | 35/100 | 78/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (59/100) | C (61/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 79/100 | Not published |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Clay | Hunter |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | AWS | Not detected |
| CDN | Cloudflare | Cloudflare |
| CMS | Webflow | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Tailwind CSS | Bootstrap |
| Analytics | Google Analytics 4, Google Tag Manager, Segment | Google Tag Manager, PostHog |
| Support stack | Not detected | Intercom |
Product and pricing
| Measure | Clay | Hunter |
|---|---|---|
| Key features | Multi-provider Data Enrichment, AI Research Agents, Flexible & Iterative Workflows, Real-time Intent Signals, Automated Outbound & Inbound, GTM Stack Consolidation | Not published |
Clay vs Hunter: common questions
Which is better, Clay or Hunter?
On our 0-100 score Hunter rates higher (62/100 against 43/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 20 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Clay and Hunter compare on the numbers?
Clay leads on headcount (1,242 against 36), funding raised ($3.0B against $63.0M), LinkedIn following (158,260 against 12,262). Hunter leads on our overall score (62/100 against 43/100).
Read the full Clay review and pricing or the Hunter review and pricing. You can also browse other Clay alternatives we track.