Two things have changed in this comparison recently, and most articles still have neither right. First, Dealfront became Leadfeeder again on 24 March 2026 — the platform unified under the Leadfeeder brand, and dealfront.com now redirects there. If you are reading a comparison that describes the product as "Dealfront (formerly Leadfeeder)," it predates the rebrand and is out of date. Second, the pricing gap between these two vendors has become the clearest difference between them.
Here is a practical comparison for a B2B team choosing between them in 2026, including the limitation they both share, which is the thing most buyers discover only after signing.
The pricing philosophies could not be more different
Leadfeeder publishes everything
Leadfeeder lists its prices openly. Cost is driven by how many companies you identify per month, with a 30% discount for annual billing and a 14-day trial that does not ask for a card:
- Lite — free forever. Last 100 companies per month, 7-day visitor history, 20 credits per month, unlimited users. A genuine free tier is rare in this category.
- Discover — from €79/mo on annual billing (€113 monthly), tiering up by company volume from 50 to 1,000.
- Activate — from €369/mo annual (€527 monthly), covering 1,000–4,000 companies with 200–1,500 credits.
- Scale — from €599/mo, annual billing only, 2,000–10,000 companies.
Credits are consumed by enrichment and activation, not by the identification itself — Leadfeeder is explicit that identifying companies visiting your site is included in your plan's company limit.
Lead Forensics publishes nothing
Lead Forensics lists two tiers, Essentials and Automate, both with a "Book a demo" button and no figures at all. Their stated model is that "pricing is calculated based on your website visitors." The flow is demo, then a one-week trial, then a bespoke quote.
The best independent signal on actual contract values comes from Vendr, which aggregates real contract data and reports a median of roughly $17,500/year with a range from about $1,700 to $70,600. Treat that as directional rather than precise — Vendr does not publish its sample size or date range. Be wary of the specific price bands quoted in competitor blogs; none of them are verifiable.
On contract length: Lead Forensics does not publish a minimum term anywhere. Agencies and reviewers consistently report a 12-month minimum and a 30-day auto-renewal window, and there are Capterra reviews describing being held to a full renewal for missing that window by a day. That is user-reported rather than vendor-confirmed, but it comes up often enough to be worth asking about directly before you sign.
Related: Leadfeeder vs Leadinfo: A Comprehensive Guide to Lead Nurturing for Sales Teams (2026)
Both are company-level. This is the part that matters.
Whichever you pick, you are buying the same fundamental capability: reverse-IP company identification. Both vendors are refreshingly explicit about this, and it is worth quoting them.
Lead Forensics: "Lead Forensics identifies visitors at the company level, not the individual level. It tells you which organization is behind a visit, not which specific person was browsing."
Leadfeeder: "By default Leadfeeder only shows company visits, not individuals… You'll only see a person's contact details if they identify themselves, for example by submitting a form."
Both then sell decision-maker contact data as a separate enrichment layer. That is important to understand precisely: those contacts are database lookups at the identified company, not the person who actually visited. If four people from a 900-person company visited your pricing page, you get the company plus a list of plausible contacts to guess between — not the four people.
Match rates: one vendor claims 80%, the other refuses to give a number
Lead Forensics markets identifying "up to 80% of B2B visits," while hedging on the same page that "match rate is an important measure, but it should never be treated as the only measure of value."
Leadfeeder takes the opposite position and declines to publish a rate at all: "As each customer is different there is no way to honestly give a percentage of visitors identified." They go further, suggesting that vendors promising specific rates are "likely based on a few accounts."
We think Leadfeeder has the better of this argument, and we would extend the scepticism to our own category generally. There is no independent audited benchmark for B2B visitor identification match rates. Every published figure — ours included — comes from a vendor with an interest in the number.
What the independent evidence actually supports
What can be said with confidence is why reverse-IP matching degrades. The mechanism maps a public IP to a registered organisation, so it fails whenever the IP does not belong to the visitor's employer:
- Home and hybrid working. In July 2026, 26% of full paid working days in the US were worked from home (Survey of Working Arrangements and Attitudes, via FRED). In the UK, 28% of working adults hybrid worked in early 2025 (ONS). Those sessions arrive on residential ISP ranges. Leadfeeder's own help centre lists home internet, mobile networks and public wifi as cases that resolve to an ISP rather than a company — and Leadfeeder filters ISP traffic out entirely rather than showing it to you.
- Carrier-grade NAT on mobile. M3AAWG, the industry anti-abuse group, states that an ISP "can put hundreds of customers behind a single external IP address," and that a server receiving multiple connections from one IP "cannot assume those connections are related in any way." That is a direct, non-vendor statement that IP-to-organisation inference is unsound on carrier networks.
- Mobile prefix coarseness. A May 2026 study across four commercial IP databases found median geolocation error of 3–16km on fixed networks versus 179–207km on mobile, with all four providers failing at similar rates — a structural limit rather than a vendor problem. (It measures geolocation rather than company attribution, but the underlying cause, coarse BGP prefixes, is the same.)
- VPNs and privacy relays. Corporate VPN egress attributes every employee to the VPN tenant. Apple's iCloud Private Relay is designed specifically to prevent IP-based profiling.
The practical takeaway: on contemporary mixed traffic, reverse-IP alone lands well below the headline numbers vendors market. Demo environments, which tend to use curated traffic, will always look better than production.
Related: Clearbit vs. Leadfeeder: Mastering Lead Scoring and Segmentation for Growth
Which should you choose?
- Testing whether this category works for you at all: start with Leadfeeder's free tier. 100 companies a month is enough to judge whether your traffic resolves usefully, and it costs nothing to find out.
- You want published pricing and no sales process: Leadfeeder, clearly. You can size the cost before talking to anyone.
- You want a mature UK-based vendor with strong support and in-house IP data: Lead Forensics reviews consistently praise support quality and ease of use. Go in with questions about term length and renewal notice periods.
- Your outbound depends on emailing named individuals: neither will get you there. That is a different product category — see our Lead Forensics alternative page or the Leadfeeder comparison for how person-level identification differs.
One last piece of advice that applies to any vendor in this category, ours included: run the trial on your real traffic, and check what proportion of identified visits are companies you could plausibly sell to. The most common complaint in Leadfeeder reviews is not that identification fails, but that much of what it surfaces is irrelevant — one reviewer reported that 70% of identified traffic came from industries unrelated to their business. Match rate is only useful if the matches are ones you want.
