What changed in Clay's pricing in 2026?
On March 11, 2026, Clay restructured its pricing by splitting costs into two currencies: platform subscription fees and Data Credits, which cover enrichment lookups from third-party data providers. Previously, Clay's plans included credits for both. Now, enrichment costs are metered separately based on which data sources you query and how many records you process.
This matters because Clay's core value is waterfall enrichment: querying multiple providers in sequence until a record is complete. That waterfall now has a per-credit cost at each step.
How does Clay's Data Credit model affect B2B outbound budgets?
Teams enriching large account lists will see costs that depend heavily on which providers they use in their waterfall sequence. ZoomInfo, Apollo, and LinkedIn-sourced data carry different credit costs. Teams that previously ran broad enrichment passes on large lists without filtering criteria will face meaningfully higher costs under the new model.
The fix is tighter targeting before enrichment: define your ICP precisely, filter the account list before passing it to Clay, and build your waterfall to exhaust cheaper sources before querying premium ones.
Is Clay still worth using for B2B outbound in 2026 after the pricing change?
For teams doing signal-based prospecting and targeted enrichment, yes. Clay's Claygent AI feature, which can research prospects at scale by pulling from websites, LinkedIn profiles, and news articles, creates value no standard data provider touches. The pricing change rewards teams who are precise about their ICP and penalises teams doing bulk undifferentiated enrichment.
Clay holds over 275 million contacts and 73 million companies in its connected provider network. The enrichment accuracy at that scale is unmatched for teams building cybersecurity, fintech, or AI-sector outbound lists.
How should B2B teams adjust their Clay workflow after the pricing change?
Three adjustments: First, define tighter ICP filters before records enter Clay. Second, order your waterfall from cheapest provider to most expensive so the expensive lookups only run when cheaper sources fail. Third, use Claygent selectively for the highest-value accounts rather than running it across your full list.
For account research tied to event-based outbound, LinkedOtter uses Clay to build precisely targeted invite lists for live events, ensuring enrichment spend correlates directly to pipeline value.
What alternatives exist if Clay's new pricing is too expensive?
Apollo provides database access with 275 million+ contacts at a lower per-record cost than Clay for standard enrichment. ZoomInfo offers deeper organisational data for enterprise accounts. The tradeoff is that Clay's waterfall and AI research capabilities have no direct equivalent in either platform.
Does the Clay pricing change affect event-led outbound campaigns specifically?
Only if you are over-enriching. For a targeted list of 1,200 to 1,500 contacts for a live event invitation, Clay's new model is cost-effective because you are enriching a pre-filtered, high-value list rather than running broad sweeps. The key is defining your event audience before enrichment, not after.