Apollo vs Pharow: which one to prospect in France in 2026?
Two opposite logics: a global LinkedIn-centric base versus the French SIRENE and INPI registries. The right pick depends on your market, not the leaderboard.
Apollo claims over 210 million B2B contacts worldwide. Pharow claims 4 million French companies. The bigger number does not win. These two tools are not even playing the same game.
One starts from LinkedIn and the whole world. The other starts from the French registries, SIRENE and INPI. Your right pick does not depend on the leaderboard, it depends on who you sell to and where. Here is the comparison, no side taken.
- Apollo: global LinkedIn-centric base, 210M+ contacts, targeting by job title, built-in engagement. Best for international SaaS and ABM.
- Pharow: French registries (SIRENE, INPI), 4M companies, 1,300+ structural filters. Best for structured France prospecting to SMBs.
- On France off the LinkedIn radar, Apollo loses legal coverage; Pharow is at home there.
- The 10-question decision checklist is below, copyable.
The real divide: where the data comes from
Everything starts here. A prospecting tool is only worth the source it aggregates, and these two sources are opposites.
Apollo aggregates the global professional web. Its base is built from public profiles, company signals and over 2 million sources, covering 35 million companies. The natural grain is the person: a job title, a company, a work email.
Pharow aggregates the official French registries. It draws on SIRENE (INSEE) and INPI for legal data: SIREN, NAF code, headcount, director, incorporation date, trademark filing. The natural grain is the French company, then the contacts inside it.
Are you selling to a job title worldwide, or to a well-defined French company? The answer picks the tool.
Coverage: whole world vs French depth
Raw volume favors Apollo. Depth on France favors Pharow. Both statements are true at once.
Apollo covers the world, so your US, UK or DACH accounts are there. Pharow only covers France, but it goes down to the tradesperson and the local shop that LinkedIn does not index. On a target like"plumbers around Lyon", registry depth beats global volume.
Filters: by person vs by structure
This is where the difference becomes concrete in daily use.
Apollo offers over 65 filters geared to person and intent: job title, seniority, tech stack, posted job openings, headcount growth. Pharow claims over 1,300 filters geared to structure: NAF code, legal form, headcount, revenue, recent trademark filing, active hiring.
The table, column by column
A factual summary. No column is highlighted, read it against your own need.
On email data, be careful not to compare two figures that do not measure the same thing. Apollo's ~97% accuracy describes the reliability of emails already in the base. Pharow's ~78.7% describes the share of emails actually found for a given French target. Accuracy on one side, coverage on the other.
Enrichment: what you actually get back
Apollo enriches around the person: work email, mobile, title, company, intent signals. You leave with a contact ready for a sequence, inside the same tool.
Pharow enriches around the French company: legal details, directors, then contact emails and phones, with a cascade enrichment logic. You leave with a structured file to export to Lemlist or Smartlead.
Who each tool is for
Two profiles, two clear answers. Read the one that looks like you.
You sell internationally, you target by job title, you want to find AND sequence in the same tool, and you run ABM on tech accounts.
You sell in France to SMBs, you target by structural criteria (NAF, headcount, revenue, legal status), and you export to your own sending tool.
The decision checklist
Do not choose on feeling. Answer these ten questions, count the YES in each block, and let the total decide.
Answer YES / NO on each line. Count the YES.
APOLLO PROFILE
[ ] I sell internationally (US, UK, DACH, not only France).
[ ] My target is defined by a job title (CTO, VP Sales, Head of Growth).
[ ] I want email AND engagement (sequences, dialer) in the same tool.
[ ] I run ABM on tech / SaaS scale-up accounts.
[ ] Intent signals (job posts, hiring, tech stack) are useful to me.
PHAROW PROFILE
[ ] I sell in France, to French TPE/PME/ETI (small to mid-market).
[ ] My target is defined by structural criteria (NAF code, headcount, revenue, legal status, director).
[ ] I need reliable legal data (SIRENE, INPI, directors, incorporation dates).
[ ] I want fine-grained targeting (trademark filing, hiring, site tech stack, precise geo zone).
[ ] I export to my own sending tool (Lemlist, Smartlead).
More YES on top: Apollo. More YES at the bottom: Pharow.
A tie: take both free trials on ONE same target list and compare the email match rate.If you are still torn, the only proof that counts: take both trials, build the same target list in each, and compare the number of valid emails found. The winner on your real target is yours, not the comparison's.
The right tool is not the biggest one. It is the one whose data source looks like your market.
Note: at AutoLeads, we build a third option, made for the hyper-local niche prospecting that neither Apollo nor Pharow covers natively. That is a separate topic, detailed in our niche + zone + audit method.
Frequently asked questions
Does Apollo work for prospecting in France?
Yes, with a caveat. Apollo's global base covers large French companies and tech scale-ups that live on LinkedIn. But on French TPE/PME off the LinkedIn radar (tradespeople, shops, practices), coverage degrades and legal data (SIREN, NAF, director) is not the source. For structured France targeting, Pharow draws directly from SIRENE and INPI.
Is Pharow cheaper than Apollo?
They are not the same offer. Apollo has a free plan and paid tiers from around $49/month that also include engagement (sequences, dialer). Pharow is a French sourcing and enrichment tool, no built-in dialer, priced on enrichment credits. Compare on cost per valid email found on your real target, not on the license price.
Which has the better email data?
It depends on the market. Apollo claims around 97% email accuracy on its global base. Pharow claims a discovery rate of about 78% of emails on the French market, measured in real conditions. Apollo's figure is about emails it already holds, Pharow's is about its ability to find the email of a given French target. Two different measurements.
Can you use both?
Yes, and some teams do. Apollo for international accounts and multichannel engagement, Pharow to build ultra-targeted France lists from the registries. The common thread: both export to a sending tool. The overlap is costly, so reserve it for a team that genuinely addresses two distinct markets.
Are these tools GDPR compliant?
Both present themselves as compliant for B2B prospecting. In France, B2B email prospecting is allowed without prior consent if the subject relates to the recipient's professional role, with a clear opt-out. Responsibility for use stays with you, whatever the tool. Refer to the CNIL guidelines.