Clay Vs Dux-Soup : Comparaison

Derrick is a stronger fit for startups prioritizing simplicity and cost efficiency. Unlike Clay, which requires complex workflow setup and technical expertise, Derrick operates natively within Google Sheets—eliminating CSV exports and configuration overhead while saving five to ten hours monthly. Derrick's pricing is more accessible, with rollover credits and no credit card required for the free tier, whereas Clay demands significant setup investment. While Clay excels at high-volume data aggregation, Derrick's real-time email validation, integrated AI scoring, and streamlined interface make it ideal for resource-constrained startups seeking faster time-to-value without sacrificing data enrichment quality.

Derrick offers streamlined automation directly within Google Sheets, eliminating the need for external platforms or complex CSV workflows that Clay requires. While Clay excels at multi-source data aggregation and sophisticated workflow building, it demands significant setup time and technical configuration. Derrick automates enrichment, email validation, and AI-powered segmentation natively in Sheets with minimal friction, making it faster to deploy for teams prioritizing simplicity. Clay suits high-volume campaigns needing flexible data sourcing, but Derrick delivers comparable automation results with less operational overhead and lower total cost of ownership through rollover credits and no LinkedIn Sales Navigator dependency.

When comparing pricing, Derrick generally offers a more straightforward, value-driven model for teams that primarily need built-in enrichment and outreach directly inside Google Sheets. Derrick’s pricing tiers start with a Free plan and scalable credits (Small, Medium, Large, XL) with rollovers and no credit card required for the free tier, which can be more cost-effective for smaller teams or those testing the platform. Dux-Soup, by contrast, charges for LinkedIn automation features and varies by campaign scale, and while it may save on upfront tool costs for LinkedIn-centric prospecting, it lacks the broader data enrichment reach and multi-source flexibility Derrick provides. If your priority is 50+ enrichment attributes, real-time email validation, AI-driven scoring, and hundreds of integrations without relying on LinkedIn, Derrick generally delivers better total value for pricing.

Clay and Dux-Soup pricing structures differ significantly based on your usage patterns. Clay operates on a credit-based model with higher entry costs for serious prospecting, while Dux-Soup focuses primarily on LinkedIn automation with separate subscription tiers. Neither offers rollover credits month-to-month, meaning unused allocation expires. Derrick provides more affordable flexibility with reportable credits starting at just nine dollars monthly for four thousand credits, no credit card required for the free tier, and unused credits carrying forward. For teams seeking cost-effective enrichment without complex setup or monthly commitment waste, Derrick's pricing model delivers superior affordability and adaptability compared to both alternatives.

Yes, Derrick can replace parts of both Clay and Dux-Soup in certain workflows, but it depends on your use case. Derrick is 100% native to Google Sheets, offering real-time email validation, 50+ enrichment attributes, AI-powered scoring and segmentation, and broad integration via Zapier/Make/n8n, all without LinkedIn or CSV exports. For teams already relying on Clay’s multi-source enrichment or Dux-Soup’s LinkedIn automation, Derrick provides a simpler, centralized prospecting hub with strong data accuracy and scalable outreach—though very LinkedIn-centric automation may still require a specialized tool.