FullEnrich vs BetterContact (2026): Data, Pricing and API Compared

FullEnrich and BetterContact are both waterfall tools: they ask many data providers for an email or a mobile and charge credits for what they find. BetterContact is cheaper at 10,000 credits a month and has the faster rate limit. FullEnrich has the larger stated database and an MCP server. Neither publishes a price at 1M records.

Verdict

• Pick FullEnrich if an AI agent needs to search, enrich and export through MCP, or you want search over a stated 800M people and 50M companies next to enrichment (FullEnrich pricing, September 2026).
• Pick BetterContact if you enrich lists you already own and want the lower price per credit at 10,000 a month, a faster rate limit and no-code integrations (BetterContact pricing, September 2026).
• Pick neither if you pull people and companies in volume through an API and want one flat bill with no credits. LeadOcean is one option, covered below.

Side by side

Data and coverage

FullEnrich states a database size and BetterContact does not. Neither publishes how many emails or phones it holds.

FullEnrich's pricing page lists full access to 800M people and 50M companies for search, and 25+ data sources behind enrichment (FullEnrich pricing, September 2026). Its homepage and MCP page also show a 1.6B contacts figure. That figure is a customer quote about coverage, not a FullEnrich database count. FullEnrich says it finds about 80% of work emails on average and removes about 30% of raw data in verification (FullEnrich pricing, September 2026). Both numbers are vendor claims.

BetterContact routes across 20+ providers in one waterfall and publishes no size (BetterContact, September 2026). It includes email verification by Bouncer in the credit and lists 28 native integrations. A waterfall is only as wide as its providers, so a bigger provider list does not prove a better find rate.

Coverage claims are hard to compare because each vendor defines a find differently. FullEnrich counts a work email as found after its own verification step. BetterContact counts a result as valid after Bouncer checks it. A catch-all address may count on one side and not the other.

We tested neither tool. The honest way to choose is a sample: send the same 500 contacts to each and compare valid emails and mobiles per credit spent. Both give 50 free credits, no card.

API and developer experience

Both are asynchronous REST APIs that take up to 100 contacts a call. Neither returns the result in the same response. Placeholders below stand in for real people.

FullEnrich authenticates with a Bearer token. This request starts a bulk enrichment for one contact, with a webhook for the result.

curl --request POST \
  --url "https://app.fullenrich.com/api/v2/contact/enrich/bulk" \
  --header "Authorization: Bearer $FULLENRICH_API_KEY" \
  --header "Content-Type: application/json" \
  --data '{
    "name": "Jane Doe",
    "webhook_url": "https://example.com/fullenrich/results",
    "data": [{
      "first_name": "Jane",
      "last_name": "Doe",
      "domain": "acme.com",
      "enrich_fields": ["contact.work_emails"]
    }]
  }'

The response carries an enrichment_id. You get results on the webhook, or you poll the bulk endpoint, which the docs do not recommend because polling uses your rate limit (FullEnrich docs, September 2026).

BetterContact uses an X-API-Key header. This request submits one lead for work email enrichment.

curl --request POST \
  --url "https://app.bettercontact.rocks/api/v2/async" \
  --header "X-API-Key: $BETTERCONTACT_API_KEY" \
  --header "Content-Type: application/json" \
  --data '{
    "data": [{
      "first_name": "Jane",
      "last_name": "Doe",
      "company_domain": "acme.com"
    }],
    "enrich_email_address": true,
    "webhook": "https://example.com/bettercontact/results"
  }'

A 201 means the batch was accepted, not enriched. Keep the returned id. The docs warn that submissions are not idempotent, so a retried POST that had succeeded spends credits twice (BetterContact docs, September 2026).

Rate limits decide how fast a big list moves. FullEnrich allows 60 calls a minute at 100 contacts a call, which is 6,000 contacts a minute. At 1M contacts that is 1,000,000 / 6,000, about 167 minutes of submitting. Each workspace also has a default queue of 100 concurrent enrichments (FullEnrich docs, September 2026).

BetterContact Pro allows 200 requests a minute, which is 20,000 leads a minute and 50 minutes of submitting for 1M. Starter allows 100 a minute, or 100 minutes (BetterContact docs, September 2026). Both figures count submission only, before the waterfall runs. Over the limit, FullEnrich returns HTTP 429 with the code error.rate.limit, and BetterContact returns 429 with the body Retry later.

On MCP, FullEnrich has a server that covers search, enrich and export, and it signs in with OAuth (FullEnrich help, September 2026). We found none for BetterContact, so an agent needs a workflow tool or your own wrapper around its REST API.

Pricing

Both bill credits, so the worked example is work-email lookups at one credit each. Monthly list price comes first, billed-yearly after it. Each tool charges nothing when it finds nothing, so the figures assume every lookup finds an email.

At 10,000 credits BetterContact is cheaper: $399 against $499 a month, or about $0.040 against $0.050 a credit. The BetterContact yearly figure is derived from its rule of paying 10 months and keeping 12 (BetterContact pricing, September 2026). The FullEnrich figures come from its tier list (FullEnrich pricing, September 2026).

FullEnrich publishes no 1M price. 1M work emails need 1,000,000 credits. Its top monthly tier is 100,000 credits for $3,500 a month, which is 10% of that volume. Above that the page says contact sales (FullEnrich pricing, September 2026).

BetterContact publishes no 1M price either. Its top public step is 50,000 credits for $1,999 a month, which is 5% of the volume. Enterprise starts from $799 a month on a custom quote (BetterContact pricing, September 2026). A million lookups in one month needs a quote from either tool.

The rest of the bill depends on what you ask for. FullEnrich charges 1 credit for a work email, 3 for a personal email and 10 for a mobile. Search costs 0.25 credits for each person or company returned (FullEnrich docs, September 2026). BetterContact charges 1 credit for an email and 10 for a mobile (BetterContact docs, September 2026).

Phones on BetterContact carry a catch. The API docs say phone enrichment needs a phone add-on on your plan or the call returns 402 (BetterContact docs, October 2026). Neither the pricing page nor the docs publish an add-on price, so ask BetterContact before you budget for API mobiles. Extra catch-all verification is a second add-on; without it, catch-all addresses come back as catch_all.

Plan shape matters at the low end. FullEnrich sells 500 credits for $29 and 1,000 for $55, and its slider climbs in 11 steps to 100,000. BetterContact sells 200 credits for $15 on Starter, then Pro steps from 1,000 credits at $49 to 50,000 at $1,999. Both offer a yearly toggle: FullEnrich is about 10% cheaper billed yearly, and BetterContact gives 2 months free.

Unused credits roll over on both. FullEnrich keeps them 3 months on monthly plans and 12 on annual plans. BetterContact caps rollover at twice the subscribed amount, with 12 months on annual plans.

Where FullEnrich wins

• An MCP server. An agent can search, enrich and export from a chat, which BetterContact does not offer.
• Search next to enrichment. It lists search over 800M people and 50M companies, on every plan including the free one.
• A stated database size and 25+ sources, against BetterContact's 20+ providers and no size.
• Personal emails at 3 credits, and unlimited users on every plan (FullEnrich pricing, September 2026).

Where BetterContact wins

• Price per credit at 10,000 a month: $399 against $499. Starter at $15 a month also undercuts FullEnrich's $29 entry plan.
• Throughput. 200 requests a minute on Pro is more than three times FullEnrich's default 60.
• No-code reach. It lists 28 native integrations, including Clay and HubSpot (BetterContact, September 2026).
• Email verification by Bouncer inside the credit, with no extra charge.

If you need volume through an API

Both tools meter every credit, and neither has a public price at 1M. LeadOcean is one dataset of 693M people and 63M companies over REST and MCP. Pro is $499 a month flat, with no credits and no per-record price, and Free gives you 1,000 records, one-off, with no card. The limit is 100 requests per second per key, and POST /v1/exports takes up to 50,000 rows per request. LeadOcean is one source with no waterfall, so it will not find a person outside its own data. See pricing.

FAQ