ApolloThe AI GTM System for Go-to-Market Teams
vs
IterableAI Customer Engagement Platform for Real-Time, Personalized Experiences
Comparison · Email Marketing · weekly run Nov 2
Apollo vs Iterable
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
Iterable is the stronger AI pick in Email Marketing: it has a visibility score of 2.6 versus 0.4 for Apollo.
Choose Apollo if…
- AI answers describe it more positively (60% vs 29% positive)
- You need GDPR or SOC 2 or CCPA or ISO/IEC 27001 or CASA Tier 2 or CPRA or EU-US DPF or PCI DSS coverage
- Large B2B contact database combined with prospecting and email sequencing
- Transparent self-serve per-user pricing with a free tier
Choose Iterable if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (2.6 vs 0.4)
- You need SOC 2 Type 2 or ISO 27001 or HIPAA or Data Privacy Framework or Global Cross-Border Privacy Rules or Global Privacy Rules for Processors coverage
- Good fit for growth-stage, retail, and media organizations running cross-channel campaigns
- Suited to high-growth, mobile-heavy consumer startups needing real-time multi-channel engagement
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 2
| Metric | Apollo | Iterable |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 0.4% | 2.6% |
| Change vs last week | New | New |
| Rank in Email Marketing | #40 | #25 |
| Share of voice | 0.3% | 0.9% |
| Mentions this run | 1 | 5 |
| Positive in AI answers | 60% | 29% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
Apollo 0pp · Iterable 0pp over 0 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
Iterable leads on 2 of 3 engines
ChatGPT
AI Mode
Perplexity
ApolloIterable
Head to head in AI answers
0 engine answers name both brands
0Apollo ranked higher
0Iterable ranked higher
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | Apollo | Iterable |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Per seat | — |
| Entry price | Contact sales | — |
| Free plan | Yes | — |
| Deployment | Cloud platform | — |
| Integrations | 200+ | — |
| Compliance | GDPR, SOC 2, CCPA, ISO/IEC 27001, CASA Tier 2, CPRA, EU-US DPF, PCI DSS | SOC 2 Type 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, Data Privacy Framework, Global Cross-Border Privacy Rules, Global Privacy Rules for Processors |
| Support | Email support at support@apollo.io, Dedicated support on Custom plans, Sales team for Custom plan discussions | Community and expert-led programs |
| Founded | 2015 | 2013 |
| Headquarters | San Francisco, CA | San Francisco, California |
| Employees | 501–1,000 | 501–1,000 |
| Funding | Series D · $250M raised | Series E · $342M raised |
| Best for | Sales and go-to-market teams that run prospecting, outreach and dialing and want data, AI and execution in one system | Global brands that want marketers to run real-time, cross-channel engagement without engineering dependency. |
Plans side by side
Iterable
Pricing not available.
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
Apollo
- Large B2B contact database combined with prospecting and email sequencing
- Transparent self-serve per-user pricing with a free tier
- Strong all-in-one value for prospecting and outreach
- Affordable, reliable choice for small teams and startups
- Widely used and highly rated by reviewers
Iterable
- Good fit for growth-stage, retail, and media organizations running cross-channel campaigns
- Suited to high-growth, mobile-heavy consumer startups needing real-time multi-channel engagement
- Strong for product-led growth and behavioral, real-time cross-channel messaging
- Named among leading analyst-backed marketing automation shortlists
- Good choice for high-scale consumer engagement
- Pricing not transparent; generally requires custom quotes
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 100%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “Apollo vs Iterable”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/apollo-vs-iterable, data of Nov 2, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.