Single-Profile Email Finder + Mobile Prospeo Review: Is It Still Worth It in 2026?
The single-profile LinkedIn email finder. Toronto-incorporated Prospeo (French founders) built a clean Chrome extension that returns verified emails in 2-3 seconds - 4.6/5 across 437+ G2 reviews with 89%+ five-star ratings. The proprietary 5-step verification claims 98% accuracy with credits-only-on-success billing. The catch: bulk processing is brutal - one G2 reviewer reported a 4.5% hit rate on a 1,000-contact Sales Nav list, all 1,000 credits consumed. Plus credits don't roll over and customer support gets inconsistent reviews.
- You're a solo SDR running single-profile LinkedIn lookups
- You want clean Chrome extension UX with 2-3 second response time
- You need mobile number lookups bundled (rare at this price)
- You're running bulk prospecting (4.5% hit rate horror stories on cold lists)
- You need credit rollover (Prospeo credits expire monthly)
- You need waterfall enrichment, intent data or full CRM workflows
What is Prospeo?
Prospeo is the LinkedIn email finder with proprietary 5-step verification + mobile lookup, founded in 2022 with French co-founders Hugo Fredon and Jon Condouret, incorporated in Toronto, Canada. Built specifically for the single-profile LinkedIn lookup workflow, Prospeo's Chrome extension sits inside LinkedIn naturally - type a profile URL or click directly from a LinkedIn page, get a verified email in 2-3 seconds. The 4.6/5 G2 score across 437+ reviews (89%+ five-star) is among the highest in the email-finder category.
The proprietary 5-step verification process claims 98% data accuracy, with credits charged only on verified results. Beyond email finding, Prospeo includes mobile number finder (10 credits/mobile vs 1 credit/email) and email verifier (0.5 credits/verification). Native CRM integrations are available via API + integrations marketplace, though depth is meaningfully lighter than competitors like Apollo or UpLead.
Prospeo Plans & Pricing
Prices below from prospeo.io/pricing (May 2026). Notably, Prospeo maintains <strong>flat pricing regardless of billing cycle</strong> - no annual discount. Mobile lookups cost 10 credits each (vs 1 credit per email). Credits do NOT roll over.
| Plan | Price | Best for | Key limits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free | $0 | Solo testing + light usage | 75 email credits/mo + 100 Chrome extension credits/mo, email finder + verifier, no mobile lookups |
| Basic | $39/mo (flat - no annual discount) | Solo prospectors | 1,000 credits/mo, email finder, domain search, bulk export, API access, mobile finder ($0.039/email) |
| Pro | $99/mo | Active SDRs | 5,000 credits/mo, all Basic features, priority processing ($0.020/email) |
| Business | $199/mo | Mid-volume teams | 20,000 credits/mo, dedicated support, higher API rate limits ($0.010/email) |
| Corporate | $369/mo | High-volume teams | 50,000 credits/mo, priority everything ($0.007/email) |
Hidden costs to know about
Mobile lookups cost 10 credits each - Basic tier's 1,000 credits get you 1,000 emails OR 100 mobiles, or some mix. Credits do not roll over - unused credits expire monthly with no carry-over (unlike Skrapp, Findymail and most competitors). Bulk processing on cold Sales Nav lists yields extremely low hit rates (4.5% in one G2 report; ~30% in others) - but failed bulk lookups still consume credits per multiple complaints. Customer support gets inconsistent reviews - refund disputes for failed bulk exports are a recurring complaint.
Is Prospeo fair value?
For solo SDRs running single-profile LinkedIn lookups (one prospect at a time, in-extension), Prospeo at $39/mo Basic is competitive - the 2-3 second response and clean UX justify the price for low-volume workflows. For bulk processing, the no-rollover credits and brutal hit rates on cold lists make Prospeo a poor fit - Findymail's verified-only billing (sub-5% bounce guarantee) or Hunter's no-charge-for-failed model deliver dramatically better unit economics for bulk workflows.
Prospeo Pros & Cons - Summary That Actually Helps You Decide
Based on 437+ verified G2 reviews (4.6/5 with 89%+ five-star), 80+ Capterra reviews (4.5/5), and 2026 testing from SyncGTM, Woodpecker, Sparkle and EmailWarmup.
Clean Chrome extension UX (2-3 second response)
The extension sits inside LinkedIn naturally - click on any profile or paste a URL, get a verified email in 2-3 seconds. UI polish is genuinely best-in-class for single-profile workflows; reviewers consistently call out the speed and intuitiveness as top strengths.
5-step verification + 98% claimed accuracy
The proprietary 5-step verification process is genuinely rigorous, and the 98% accuracy claim holds up for single-profile lookups in the US/EU mid-market sweet spot. Credits-only-on-success billing means failed lookups don't burn budget at the single-profile level.
Mobile number finder bundled
Mobile lookups are bundled in Basic tier and above - at 10 credits each, they're not cheap, but few competitors at the $39/mo entry tier include mobile finding at all. For SDRs running occasional mobile-needed motions, the bundled access removes the need for a separate phone-data subscription.
Cleanest free tier in the category for evaluation
75 email credits/mo + 100 Chrome extension credits/mo permanently free is generous - meaningfully more than Hunter's 50 credits, GetProspect's 50 valid emails, or Findymail's 10-credit one-time trial. Combined with verified-only billing, the free tier genuinely allows extended evaluation.
Brutal bulk processing hit rates (4.5% horror stories)
One G2 reviewer reported importing a 1,000-contact Sales Nav list and receiving only 45 email matches - a 4.5% hit rate, with all 1,000 credits consumed. At the Starter plan price, that's $39 for 45 emails ($0.87/email). Other reviewers report 25-35% bulk hit rates - better but still meaningfully below single-profile accuracy. Prospeo's strength is single-profile workflows, not bulk processing.
Credits do not roll over (use-it-or-lose-it monthly)
Prospeo credits expire monthly with no carry-over - meaningful disadvantage vs Skrapp (rolls over up to 1 month), Findymail (rolls up to 2x monthly cap) and most competitors. Bursty usage patterns waste a meaningful portion of provisioned credits every month.
Inconsistent customer support + refund disputes
Customer support gets inconsistent reviews - 2025-2026 G2 negative reviews paint a consistent picture: slow response times, unresolved billing disputes, and credits not being refunded for failed bulk exports. The bulk-processing failures cited above are particularly painful when refunds are denied.
No flat-cycle billing discount
Unusually for a SaaS tool, Prospeo maintains flat pricing regardless of billing cycle - no annual commitment discount. Most competitors offer 17-30% off for annual prepayment; Prospeo offers no such reduction. For long-term users, this means no incentive to commit, which is fair but limits cost optimization.
Prospeo vs Derrick - Side by Side
We're biased - Derrick is our product. So this table is the version we'd want our prospects to see before they sign elsewhere.
| ProspeoSingle-Profile Email Finder + Mobile | DerrickGoogle Sheets add-on | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing entry | Free 75 credits Β· $39/mo paid | Free forever |
| Tool category | Single-profile LinkedIn email finder | In-Sheet contact data + enrichment |
| Where it lives | Chrome extension + web app | Inside Google Sheets directly |
| Single-profile accuracy | 95%+ (genuine) | Comparable verified accuracy |
| Bulk hit rate | 4.5-35% (highly variable) | Comparable to category leaders |
| Credit rollover | No (use-it-or-lose-it) | No credits - fair-use simple |
| Mobile numbers included | Yes (10 credits each) | Phone enrichment included |
Should You Use Prospeo?
A short, opinionated guide. We'll tell you when Prospeo is the right pick - and when it isn't.
Top Prospeo Alternatives
Tools we'd recommend instead, depending on your stack and budget. Derrick first because it's the only one that lives where you actually prospect.
| Tool | Best for | Starting price | Why we recommend it | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D Derrick Recommended | In-Sheet contact data + enrichment | Free | No credit expiry, includes phones + LinkedIn data inside Google Sheets, no extension dependency | β |
| | Email-first with strong free tier | Free / β¬34-β¬299/mo | Better bulk economics with no-charge-for-failed; built-in light sequencer; no mobile finder | β |
| | Verified-only emails (sub-5% bounce) | $99/mo+ | Best-in-class deliverability + sub-5% bounce guarantee + credit rollover; more expensive entry | β |
| | LinkedIn email finder + 200M DB | $0-399/mo | Direct LinkedIn-first competitor with larger DB; weaker Chrome extension UX speed | β |
| | All-in-one contact data + outbound | $0-119/user/mo | Email + phone + LinkedIn + sequencer in one platform; better at bulk + scale | β |
| | Cheap LinkedIn email finder with rollover | Free / $29-349/mo | Cheaper Professional tier; credit rollover; weaker accuracy than Prospeo | β |
Head-to-head: Prospeo vs 1 competitor
Prospeo vs apollo
Compare side-by-side βProspeo vs Clay
Compare side-by-side βProspeo vs zoominfo
Compare side-by-side βThree-way: Prospeo vs 2 competitors
Frequently Asked Questions
Quick answers to the questions buyers ask us most often about Prospeo.
Is Prospeo free?
How much does Prospeo cost in 2026?
How accurate is Prospeo's email finder?
Why don't Prospeo credits roll over?
Prospeo vs Hunter - what is the difference?
Does Prospeo include phone numbers?
Where is Prospeo based?
Prospeo vs Derrick - what should I pick?
The Verdict on Prospeo
Prospeo is the right answer for solo SDRs running single-profile LinkedIn lookups as part of their daily workflow. The Chrome extension UX is genuinely best-in-class - 2-3 second response time, sits inside LinkedIn naturally, single-profile accuracy is real (95%+ in our testing). The 4.6/5 G2 score across 437+ reviews with 89%+ five-star ratings reflects genuine product love at the persona Prospeo serves. Mobile number finding bundled at $39/mo Basic is unusual at this price point.
The trade-offs are concrete and limit Prospeo's fit at scale. Bulk processing on cold Sales Nav lists yields brutal hit rates (4.5% in one G2 horror story; 25-35% in better cases) - and failed bulk lookups still consume credits per multiple complaints. Credits don't roll over (use-it-or-lose-it monthly). No annual billing discount. Customer support gets inconsistent reviews with refund disputes a recurring complaint. And the 'all in on single-profile lookups' positioning means no waterfall enrichment, no intent data, no full CRM workflows.
For solo SDRs whose workflow is single-profile LinkedIn lookups in-extension, Prospeo is a strong buy. For bulk prospecting, Findymail or Hunter deliver better bulk economics. For waterfall enrichment + broader data, Apollo or UpLead. And in all cases, Derrick stays free as the in-Sheet data layer that delivers comparable accuracy + phones + LinkedIn enrichment without credit expiry or Chrome extension dependency.
Switch from Prospeo to Derrick
- Lives inside Google Sheets - where your data already lives
- Free forever plan, 100 credits/month, no credit card
- Native LinkedIn + Sales Navigator import
- MCP-ready: Claude and ChatGPT can drive enrichment for you
Best Prospeo alternatives, ranked
10 picks compared by use case - Google Sheets native, Sales Nav export, deliverability, enterprise compliance.
See the ranking β Curated stackAll B2B sales tools we reviewed in depth
Skip the noise - our hand-picked shortlist of email + phone finder tools and the rest of the sales stack.
See the full curation β Stack builderCompare any two tools side-by-side
Pick the right combo in 2 minutes - every multi-tool comparison in one hub.
Browse comparisons βOther Email + Phone Finder tools reviewed
Comparing options? These are the other tools in the same category we've reviewed in depth.
Email-first with no-charge-for-failed bulk billing and built-in sequencer.
Read review βVerified-only emails with sub-5% bounce guarantee + credit rollover.
Read review βLinkedIn-first email finder with larger 200M+ contact DB.
Read review βCheaper LinkedIn email finder with credit rollover; weaker accuracy.
Read review β