Conduit
3-way comparison

Apollo vs Clay vs Conduit

Three B2B tools, three different bets. Apollo's 270M-record database, Clay's workbench UX, Conduit's end-to-end loop. Here's when each wins.

B2B enrichment + outbound used to mean Apollo or ZoomInfo. Then Clay reinvented the enrichment workbench. Now Conduit ships the same waterfall as Clay plus the sequences and inbox to run on the data. The three tools target overlapping pain but with very different design philosophies.

Who's in the ring

Conduit

Unified marketing platform with enrichment, sequences, inbox

Strength

End-to-end loop in one workspace

Weakness

Database depth (93K internal + waterfall) doesn't match Apollo's 270M

Apollo.io

B2B database + email + dialer + sequences

Strength

270M-record database, integrated dialer

Weakness

Per-credit pricing, weak inbox + LinkedIn

Clay

Enrichment workbench with spreadsheet UI

Strength

Best-in-class cell-by-cell enrichment control

Weakness

Not a CRM; sequences via Smartlead integration

Side-by-side breakdown

Database depth

Apollo
270M+ contacts
Clay
Waterfall across 50+ providers
Conduit
93K internal + Brave + You.com + BYO Apollo / Hunter

Pricing at 100K credits/mo

Apollo
$149/user/mo + credit overages
Clay Pro
$349/mo
Conduit Growth
$397/mo flat

Includes sequencer

Apollo
Yes (email + LinkedIn)
Clay
Smartlead integration
Conduit
Yes (email + LinkedIn + DM)

Includes inbox

Apollo
Limited
Clay
No
Conduit
Unified across channels

AI cost model

Apollo
Per-credit
Clay
OpenAI billed via credits
Conduit
Free (local Mistral / Llama)

Score

Conduit

89

Best end-to-end loop. Database depth is the trade-off.

Apollo

86

Best database. Per-credit pricing scales painfully.

Clay

88

Best workbench UX. Not an end-to-end platform.

Verdict

Need raw database breadth (Fortune 500, international contacts)? Apollo. Need cell-by-cell workbench control over enrichment? Clay. Need enrichment + sequences + inbox in one workspace? Conduit. Many agencies run Clay + Conduit: Clay for novel list-building, Conduit for the operating system around it.

FAQ

Can I use Clay + Conduit together?
Yes — common pattern. Clay's webhook node pushes enriched rows to Conduit, which becomes the operating system for sequences + inbox.
Can I BYO Apollo into Conduit?
Yes — plug your Apollo API key into Conduit's Enrichment Providers. Conduit routes only the cache + internal misses to Apollo. 30-day cache means you don't re-spend Apollo credits.
Database coverage for Pacific Northwest small business?
Conduit's internal 93K-lead DB has strong coverage for California / Pacific Northwest small-business B2B. For broader US or international, lean on BYO Apollo / Hunter via the waterfall.
Migration from Apollo?
Export contacts + sequences from Apollo. Import contacts into Conduit. Recreate sequences (Apollo sequence JSON maps reasonably to Conduit's sequence builder; ~1 day for a typical 5-step sequence with branching).
Migration from Clay?
Export Clay tables as CSV. Conduit imports as contacts. Custom Clay formulas need to be recreated as Conduit Flows or AI enrichment fields. Plan ~1 week for a complex Clay workspace.
Total cost of ownership at 1M lookups/mo?
Apollo: $1,500-$2,500/mo with overages. Clay Enterprise: $2,000+/mo. Conduit Atelier: $997/mo + BYO external credits on cache misses (typically <$200/mo).
Built-in dialer?
Apollo ships a dialer. Conduit and Clay don&apos;t (Twilio adapter on Conduit roadmap Q3 2026). If voice is core, Apollo wins.
Spreadsheet workbench?
Clay&apos;s spreadsheet UI is unique. Conduit&apos;s contact view is grid-style but not formula-driven. For workbench-style enrichment, Clay is the right tool.