Clay Vs Hunter : Comparaison

Yes, Derrick is an excellent alternative to Clay for Google Sheets users. Unlike Clay, which requires external platforms and CSV exports, Derrick operates natively within Google Sheets, eliminating setup complexity and saving five to ten hours monthly. While Clay excels at workflow automation, Derrick offers integrated AI scoring with Claude and ChatGPT, real-time email validation, and fifty plus enrichment attributes per contact. For Google Sheets-first teams, Derrick's streamlined approach, rollover credits, and no credit card requirement for the free tier provide greater flexibility and faster implementation than Clay's more complex configuration demands.

Derrick operates as a Google Sheets native platform, eliminating the need for CSV exports and complex external configurations that Clay requires. While Clay excels at workflow automation across multiple data sources, Derrick streamlines the entire process directly within Sheets with real-time email validation and integrated AI powered by Claude and ChatGPT for automatic scoring and segmentation. Pricing-wise, Derrick offers rollover credits starting at just nine dollars monthly with no credit card required for the free tier, whereas Clay's pricing structure demands upfront commitment. For teams prioritizing simplicity and speed without technical overhead, Derrick delivers a more straightforward alternative to Clay's feature-heavy approach.

For small teams choosing between Derrick and Clay, Derrick generally offers more cost-efficiency and simplicity. Derrick is 100% native Google Sheets with no CSV exports or complex setups, plus monthly reusable credits and a free tier, which translates to predictable costs as you scale. Clay, while strong in real-time data enrichment and multi-source sourcing, can require more configuration and ongoing data validation, potentially increasing time-to-value and total cost for smaller teams. Derrick’s pricing tiers (Free 200 credits, Small 4000 credits for 9€, up to XL 100000 credits for 175€) plus credit rollovers provide a clear, flexible budget path, making it a pragmatic choice for budget-conscious small teams prioritizing speed and ease of use.

Hunter specializes primarily in email discovery and verification, while Clay offers broader data enrichment across 50+ sources with workflow automation capabilities. However, neither platform matches the comprehensiveness of Derrick's enrichment approach. Derrick provides 50+ attributes per contact and company directly within Google Sheets, combining real-time email validation with integrated AI scoring from Claude and ChatGPT. Unlike Hunter's email-focused limitations or Clay's complex setup requirements, Derrick delivers streamlined, native enrichment without external platforms, making it ideal for teams prioritizing both depth and simplicity in their prospecting workflow.

Derrick can replace some workflow elements provided by Clay and Hunter, but not every feature they offer. Derrick excels as a 100% native Google Sheets enrichment platform with real-time email validation, AI-driven scoring and segmentation, and extensive automation via 3000+ integrations, all without CSV exports or complex setup. Clay provides multi-source data enrichment and advanced outbound automation, while Hunter specializes in accurate email discovery and verification. If your workflow centers on fast, in-Sheets enrichment, scoring, and scalable, low-friction outreach, Derrick can cover a large portion of needs. However, for highly specialized data sources, firmographic depth, or multi-channel enrichment beyond email, you may still rely on Clay or Hunter to complement Derrick. In short, Derrick can replace many of their workflow components for simplicity and speed, with potential trade-offs in data depth (Clay) and pure email discovery breadth (Hunter).