TL;DR
Single-source enrichment covers 50-70% of your target list. Waterfall enrichment covers 85-95% by cascading through 15+ providers. The cost per usable record is nearly identical - but waterfall gives you 300+ more reachable contacts per 1,000 records. Those extra contacts are pipeline you would never see with a single provider.
Your data enrichment approach determines how much of your target market you can actually reach. Choose wrong and you leave revenue on the table.
Single-source enrichment queries one database. Waterfall enrichment cascades through 15+ providers in sequence. Both have trade-offs.
Here is the full comparison.
How Single-Source Enrichment Works
You pick a provider - Apollo, ZoomInfo, Lusha, or similar. Every record you enrich goes to that single database. You get back whatever they have.
The flow:
Input: john@acme.com
-> Query Provider A
-> Return whatever Provider A has
Simple. Fast. But limited to one provider's coverage.
How Waterfall Enrichment Works
Waterfall enrichment queries multiple providers in priority order. It stops when it finds verified, complete data for each field.
The flow:
Input: john@acme.com
-> Query Provider A: email found, no phone
-> Query Provider B: phone found, not verified
-> Query Provider C: phone found, verified
-> Merge best data from each source
-> Return complete, verified record
More complex under the hood. But the output is more complete.
Head-to-Head Comparison
| Factor | Single-Source | Waterfall |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | 50-70% | 85-95% |
| Accuracy | Provider-dependent | Cross-validated |
| Speed | Fast (1 query) | Slightly slower (sequential) |
| Cost per record | Lower | Slightly higher |
| Cost per valid record | Higher (more gaps) | Lower (fewer gaps) |
| Phone coverage | 20-40% | 50-70% |
| Email verification | Often basic | Triple verification |
| Setup complexity | Simple | Simple (if managed) |
When Single-Source Wins
Single-source enrichment makes sense in specific situations.
You have a narrow ICP
If your entire target market is US-based SaaS companies with 50-500 employees, one good provider might cover 80%+ of your list. The marginal benefit of waterfall is smaller.
Budget is extremely tight
If you are enriching thousands of records and every cent matters, single-source is cheaper per record. Just expect more gaps.
Speed is the priority
One API call is faster than sequential queries through 15 providers. If you need sub-second enrichment in a real-time workflow, single-source is simpler.
When Waterfall Wins
Waterfall enrichment delivers better results in most B2B scenarios.
Your ICP spans multiple segments
Targeting SMBs and enterprises? US and Europe? Tech and manufacturing? No single provider covers all segments equally. Waterfall combines specialists.
Accuracy matters more than cost
Sending emails to the wrong address damages your sender reputation. Calling wrong numbers wastes rep time. Waterfall's cross-validation catches errors single-source misses.
You have tried single-source and hit limits
If you are reading this, you probably already tried Apollo or ZoomInfo. You probably have 30-50% gaps. Those gaps represent unreachable pipeline.
CRM data needs ongoing cleanup
CRM data decays 30% per year. Waterfall enrichment fills gaps from multiple sources, catching records that have fallen out of one provider's database but still exist in others.
Phone numbers are critical
Direct dial coverage is the weakest link for most providers. Waterfall can query phone specialists that single-source tools skip entirely.
The Real Cost Comparison
Per-record cost is misleading. What matters is cost per usable record.
Single-source example:
- 1,000 records enriched at $0.10/record = $100
- 60% coverage = 600 usable records
- Cost per usable record = $0.17
Waterfall example:
- 1,000 records enriched at $0.15/record = $150
- 90% coverage = 900 usable records
- Cost per usable record = $0.17
Same cost per usable record. But waterfall gives you 300 more contacts to work with.
And those 300 extra contacts? That is pipeline you would never have seen with single-source.
Coverage Gap Analysis
Where do single-source gaps come from?
Geographic gaps: Provider A is strong in North America, weak in EMEA. Your European targets get no data.
Company size gaps: Provider B covers enterprises well, but misses SMBs. Your mid-market targets are invisible.
Role gaps: Provider C has executive data, but SDR and manager-level contacts are sparse. You can not build full buying committees.
Freshness gaps: Provider D has the contact, but the data is 18 months old. The person changed jobs.
Waterfall enrichment fills each gap with a specialist provider. European data from a European specialist. Phone numbers from a phone specialist. Fresh data from providers that update more frequently.
Making the Switch
If you are currently on single-source and considering waterfall, here is how to evaluate.
Step 1: Audit your current gaps
Export your CRM contacts. Count missing emails, missing phones, missing company data. Calculate your current coverage rate.
Step 2: Run a side-by-side test
Take 500 records with gaps. Run them through Cleanlist's waterfall enrichment. Compare fill rates.
Step 3: Calculate the ROI
More complete data = more outreach targets = more pipeline. Even a 20% improvement in coverage can meaningfully impact revenue.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I use waterfall enrichment alongside my existing tool?
Yes. Many teams use waterfall to fill gaps that their primary tool misses. Upload your incomplete records and let waterfall find what is missing.
Does waterfall enrichment take longer?
Slightly. Individual records take 2-30 seconds vs. near-instant for single-source. Bulk enrichment of 1,000 records takes 5-15 minutes. For most workflows this is not a bottleneck.
Is waterfall enrichment GDPR compliant?
Cleanlist is GDPR and SOC II compliant. All data providers in the waterfall are vetted for compliance. Data processing agreements cover the full chain.
The bottom line: single-source is fine for narrow, budget-constrained use cases. For everything else, waterfall enrichment delivers more complete data at a similar effective cost. Try Cleanlist's waterfall enrichment free and see the difference on your own data.