The one line difference
A licensed database with an MCP, against a live search charged per lead.
GetLeads describes itself as a B2B lead database MCP for AI agents, with 402M+ B2B contacts and unlimited B2B contact data on a plan its pricing page lists at $497 a month. The value is breadth: a very large licensed corpus your agent can query, at a fixed monthly cost.
LeadFindr holds no corpus. Each search reads Google Maps listings for the niche and city, opens each business's own website while the search runs, and returns the contact details published there plus the decision maker behind the business. You pay 0.25 credits, about $0.025, only for the leads that came back contactable. Our MCP is in early access, so today the searches run in the app.
Side by side
Published facts only, each with the date we read it.
| LeadFindr | GetLeads | |
|---|---|---|
| Billing | 0.25 credits a lead with contact details, about $0.025 | $497 a month for unlimited B2B contact data, per its pricing page |
| Data model | No stored corpus. Google Maps listings plus the business's live website, read at search time | A licensed contact database, described as 402M+ B2B contacts |
| Best fit | Local businesses and the owners or managers behind them | B2B contacts at company scale |
| Agent access | MCP in early access. The app is live today | Its site positions the MCP as the product |
| Cost of an empty row | Nothing. Leads without contact details are free | Covered by the monthly plan either way |
| Freshness | Checked while your search runs, so closed businesses and dead sites drop out | As fresh as the licensed corpus is |
When GetLeads is the better buy
Breadth and availability, today.
- You want a very large B2B corpus and predictable monthly cost rather than a per lead meter.
- Your agent needs data access working right now: their MCP is their shipped product, ours is early access.
- Your targets are companies with employees, where a licensed database has depth we cannot match.
- You query the same market repeatedly and a flat fee beats metered spend.
When LeadFindr is the better buy
Local data, and a bill that follows the work.
- Your list is places on a map: trades, clinics, restaurants, salons, gyms. That is where licensed corpora thin out.
- You search in bursts, and a monthly plan would run through the quiet weeks.
- You want the email read off the business's own page at search time rather than from a record collected earlier.
- You want empty rows to cost nothing, which in a true local niche is a large share of the map.
The honest caveat sits on our side: if you need agent access this week, GetLeads has it shipped and we do not.
Why local is a different data problem
It is not that one is better, it is that the record does not exist.
A contact database is built by collecting and keeping records. A two person plumbing firm has no employee directory to collect, the owner has no corporate profile, and the business may have changed hands since anyone looked. So local coverage is thin by construction, and what exists ages badly.
Reading the live page inverts the trade: nothing is stored to go stale, but the search is slower and only covers what is published. Which of those you want depends entirely on whether your buyer is a company or a place.
Questions People Actually Ask.
Is LeadFindr a GetLeads alternative?
For local businesses and the people who run them, yes. For a broad B2B corpus at company scale, GetLeads holds data we do not: its site describes 402M+ B2B contacts, read on 15 September 2026.
What does GetLeads cost?
Its pricing page describes unlimited B2B contact data at $497 a month, read on 15 September 2026. We do not quote any other tier because we could not read one on its public pages.
Can my agent use LeadFindr over MCP like GetLeads?
Not yet. Our MCP and Claude Code skill are in early access, with nothing installable published. DM Champ already runs a hosted MCP server for its own API and LeadFindr joins it.
Can I use both?
Sensibly, yes. A licensed corpus for the company half of your market and a live per lead search for the local half is a reasonable split.