Apollo vs Dight: The Local Prospecting Tool That Actually Fits Your Business

You've Already Chosen Wrong Once

Most local service providers and agencies pick their prospecting tool the way they pick lunch: fast, based on a recommendation from someone's Slack channel, and with zero understanding of what they actually need.

Then six months later, they're staring at $500/month software that finds them nobody worth calling.

Apollo.io and Dight.pro aren't the same tool wearing different jerseys. They're built for different hunts. And picking the wrong one doesn't just waste money. It wastes your team's time, which is worse.

What Apollo.io Actually Does (And Doesn't)

Apollo's been around longer. It's slick. The interface doesn't make you want to throw your laptop through a wall. And it's built at scale, which means it's built for scale.

Apollo excels at two core things:

• Volume prospecting with real data hygiene. If you need 500 contact records for a cold email campaign, Apollo will find them, verify them, and hand them to you with a confidence score. The data's actually usable.


• Intent signals for accounts actively hiring or moving. Apollo's job change and tech adoption signals tap into real hiring and spending patterns. If a local manufacturer just posted three new positions on LinkedIn, Apollo might catch that.

Here's what Apollo doesn't do well: hyper-local, high-context prospecting.

It's not terrible at it. But it's not built for it. Apollo's search filters are powerful, but they're broad. They work at 100,000-contact scale, not "every plumber in my zip code that doesn't have a mobile-responsive website" scale.

Apollo also assumes you want to email your way to deals. Which, fine. Email works. But if you're a local SMMA or service provider, you might want phone numbers and intent signals that matter at neighborhood scale, not enterprise scale.

Dight.pro's Narrower, Sharper Blade

Dight.pro is younger. It's scrappier. And it's built specifically for people who need hyper-local, niche-specific prospecting without the bloat.

Dight does three things exceptionally well:

• Hyperlocal search with real behavioral signals. Dight lets you layer intent, things like "businesses without a Google Business Profile," "low website traffic," or "no social media activity," onto geographic boundaries. If you're a web designer hunting for contractors in Denver with weak digital presence, Dight's filters are purpose-built for that.


• Faster setup with less data noise. You're not wading through 500 verified contacts where half are outdated. Dight's approach is tighter. Fewer leads, higher signal.


• Phone-first workflows. Dight treats phone outreach as the primary channel. Better phone number validation, easier calling integrations, less "let's spam their email" energy.

The tradeoff: Dight's data volume is smaller. If you're running a 5,000-contact campaign, Apollo's your move. If you're running a 200-contact, high-intent local blitz, Dight's more efficient.

The Honest Breakdown: Who Wins Where

Pick Apollo if: You're an agency scaling multiple client campaigns. You need verified email lists. You want to catch talent movements and job changes. You're comfortable with broader, lower-context searches and want a platform that does everything decently. You need the vendor support and ecosystem integrations (Zapier, CRM plugins, etc.).

Pick Dight if: You're a local service provider or solo agency hunting in specific niches and geographies. You care about behavioral signals (bad websites, missing online presence) more than job postings. You want to call first, email second. You're optimizing for quality over volume. You don't need 47 integrations. You need clean data and fast outreach.

The Real Issue Nobody Talks About

Most teams fail with both tools for the same reason: they don't have a follow-up system.

You get the list. The tool says "500 qualified leads." Your team gets excited. Then what? Nobody calls. Nobody sequences emails. The list sits in a spreadsheet for three weeks and becomes stale. You blame the tool. The tool's not the problem.

Apollo and Dight are only as good as your actual execution. Dight's advantage here is psychological: smaller, tighter lists force you to move faster. Bigger lists (Apollo) let you procrastinate longer.

Pricing Reality

Apollo starts around $49/month for personal use, scaling to $399+/month for teams. You get calling, email sequences, basic integrations.

Dight pricing is lower on entry ($29 to $99/month), but scales less aggressively. It's priced for solopreneurs and small teams, not enterprises.

If you're a freelancer or 2-person agency, Dight's cheaper and more focused. If you're running 20+ concurrent campaigns across multiple verticals, Apollo's economics start making sense.

The Reality Check

Neither tool finds you perfect clients. Both rely on public data (LinkedIn, ZoomInfo, Google, etc.). Both occasionally miss the mark. The difference isn't magic. It's focus.

Apollo's better if you need volume and breadth. Dight's better if you need precision and local context. Pick based on how you actually prospect, not on who has the prettier website or the bigger logo in their case studies.

And whichever you choose: set a 30-day execution rule. Pick 50 prospects. Call or email them. See what happens. Most teams waste more time debating tools than actually using them.

Stop overthinking it. Pick one. Work it. Report back.