search legion

Head-to-head · Sales engagement

HeyReach vs Lusha

HeyReach automates LinkedIn outreach; Lusha supplies prospect data and buying signals. They solve different jobs, with different pricing units.

HeyReach

7.0/10
VS

Lusha

6.5/10

We may earn a commission if you buy through links on this page. It never changes a score or a ranking. How we make money

Short answer

It's a split decision.

Pick HeyReach if the job is automating LinkedIn outreach across multiple accounts: Growth is $64 per sender/month on annual billing ($79 monthly), with unlimited campaigns and inbox/API tools. Pick Lusha if you need prospect data, buying signals and account scoring: it has a free plan with 40 monthly credits, while Starter is $37.45/month billed yearly. These are different tools, not like-for-like replacements. Lusha is cheaper to start; HeyReach is the clearer fit for sending campaigns. Check sender allowances and credit limits before switching.

01Side by side

HeyReachLusha
Paid starting priceGrowth: $64 per sender/month, billed yearlyStarter: $37.45/month, billed yearly
Free planNo free plan listed40 monthly credits; one seat
Best forLinkedIn outbound campaigns across multiple accountsB2B prospecting, signals, and account intelligence
Core strengthCampaign automation, sender rotation, and unified inboxVerified contact data, buying signals, and account scoring
Learning curveNot stated on the vendor's siteNot stated on the vendor's site
Integrations and dataLead imports, API, webhooks, and MCPVerified data, signals, browser extension, and API
Team and seat costsGrowth is per sender; Unlimited caps at 300Starter has one seat; Pro includes two
SupportAgency onboarding and Slack; Unlimited priority supportSupport terms not stated on the vendor's site

Choose HeyReach if

  • Choose HeyReach if you automate LinkedIn campaigns across multiple accounts.
  • Choose HeyReach if you need a shared LinkedIn inbox and reply tagging.
  • Choose HeyReach if you want API, webhooks, and MCP access.

Choose Lusha if

  • Choose Lusha if you need verified business contacts and company data.
  • Choose Lusha if buying signals and ICP account scoring matter.
  • Choose Lusha if you want a free plan with 40 monthly credits.

02Pricing compared

Lusha is cheaper to start. Its Free plan includes 40 credits per month for one seat; Starter is listed at $37.45 per month when billed yearly, with 4,800 credits per year. The pricing page says monthly billing is available, but does not publish its rates. Extra credit prices are also not published.

HeyReach Growth costs $64 per sender per month on annual billing, or $79 monthly. It includes unlimited campaigns, but the per-sender price means costs rise with each sender. Agency is $999 monthly for 25 senders; Unlimited is $2,999 monthly and caps senders at 300. Annual equivalents are $800 and $2,399 per month, respectively. Neither product is a direct price match: Lusha sells data credits and seats, while HeyReach charges for outreach capacity.

03Features and depth

These products solve different problems. HeyReach automates LinkedIn outreach across accounts: it supports campaign actions such as connection requests, messages, voice notes and profile views, plus sender rotation and a unified inbox. Teams can import leads from tools including Sales Navigator, Clay, RB2B and HubSpot. Its listed Growth features also include API access, webhooks and an MCP server. Check the plan details: Agency includes 25 senders, while the plan named Unlimited caps sender count at 300.

Lusha is built for prospecting and account intelligence, not running LinkedIn campaigns. It provides business contact and company data, email confidence scores, and 30 types of dated buying signals. Its account scoring, buying committee mapping and lookalike features help teams prioritize targets. API access is listed on Pro; buying intent topics and credit allowances vary by plan. Lusha can help find and qualify prospects, but it is not a like-for-like replacement for HeyReach's campaign automation.

04Ease of use and learning curve

The products have different learning curves because their workflows differ. Lusha is the more direct starting point if the task is finding contacts: its Free plan gives one user 40 credits a month, and the product is available through Workspace, a browser extension, API and AI chat integrations. More seats and credits may mean a plan change or contacting sales.

HeyReach is aimed at teams coordinating campaigns across LinkedIn accounts. Sender setup, campaign automation, inbox management and integrations add more moving parts than contact lookup. Its Growth plan is priced per sender, so decide how many accounts need access before comparing costs. The published review summaries score both products 7 for ease of use; neither should be treated as a substitute for the other’s workflow.

Questions people ask

Can Lusha replace HeyReach?

Not if you need automated LinkedIn campaigns. HeyReach handles campaign actions, sender rotation and centralized replies. Lusha focuses on contact data, buying signals and account intelligence. Lusha may help you identify prospects, but the published product details do not list HeyReach-style campaign automation.

Is HeyReach cheaper than Lusha?

Not for the smallest starting price: Lusha has a free plan and Starter is listed at $37.45 per month billed yearly. HeyReach Growth starts at $64 per sender per month on annual billing. The prices buy different things—Lusha credits and data access versus HeyReach outreach capacity.

Does HeyReach have unlimited senders?

Not across every plan. Growth is priced per sender, Agency includes 25 senders, and the plan called Unlimited is capped at 300 senders. Check the sender allowance against your account count before switching; the name alone does not describe every plan’s limit.

How many credits does Lusha include?

Lusha Free includes 40 credits per month for one seat. Starter includes 4,800 credits per year, Pro 7,200, and Premium 40,800, with credits granted upfront on paid plans. Scale has custom credits, and the price of additional credits is not published.