This is a showdown between automated prospecting flow and sheer contact data volume. CASTANET offers reliable, continuous LinkedIn automation focused on prospect context. Lusha provides massive B2B data but faces significant user concerns regarding privacy and trust. Deciding between CASTANET and Lusha means weighing compliance against contact scaling.
Solid 24/7 lead-gen tool
We see CASTANET as practical, scalable automation for sales teams, with 24/7 lead generation and clear fit signals. Overall, it's a solid choice for steady pipeline growth, though onboarding speed and pricing should be considered.
Strong data, risky privacy practices
We review Lusha as a go-to prospecting tool that delivers real-time leads and automation, supported by high-accuracy contact data. Yet real-world sentiment highlights privacy concerns, unsolicited outreach, and data quality doubts. Overall, we find value in the features, but trust and compliance risks temper its appeal.
💼 CASTANET is a lead-generation tool for LinkedIn designed for sales teams and professionals who want steady, automated prospecting. It helps you understand why a prospect is a fit by noting the schools they attended, the groups they belong to, and the events they attend. It exports lead profiles to your CRM automatically via Zapier or Google Sheets, and it can connect to Slack or thousands of apps through Zapier.
Lusha AI is a B2B sales platform that helps teams find verified contacts and signals to move deals faster. It surfaces ready-to-connect prospects and automates outreach and data workflows so reps can stay focused on selling. 🎯
The tool is pitched for multiple roles—Sales, RevOps, Marketers, and Recruiters—and it works with your existing tools to enrich CRM data and streamline follow-ups.
We highlight the main differences and pick a winner for each feature.
Trust is the critical difference; CASTANET shows reliability while Lusha faces major privacy scrutiny.
CASTANET receives generally positive reviews for reliable functionality and steady lead flow. User feedback highlights CASTANET's strength in consistent, automated prospecting without major complaints. Lusha struggles immensely with user trust regarding data handling and unsolicited outreach. Its user rating is significantly low due to these serious privacy concerns and GDPR worries. The core trade-off: use CASTANET for trusted process automation or accept the trust risk with Lusha's data volume. Many users report difficulty with Lusha's opt-out processes and auto-renewal friction. If brand safety and compliance are paramount for your team, CASTANET is the much safer choice. Lusha's data quality and sourcing methodology are often questioned by frustrated users.
CASTANET targets relational context; Lusha targets real-time buying signals and intent.
CASTANET delivers unique 'why fit' signals for prospects, showing schools, groups, and events. This rich context helps sales teams tailor the outreach message effectively and avoid generic connections. Lusha’s strength is surfacing real-time leads and buying signals to shorten the entire sales pipeline. It focuses more on intent and immediate action rather than deep relational context. Use CASTANET when manual personalization based on LinkedIn activity is crucial for your outreach. Choose Lusha when timing your reach based on live buying signals is your priority. CASTANET is about quality, context-driven connections; Lusha is about speed and large-scale signal detection.
Lusha commands a massive B2B database; CASTANET focuses only on reliable, automated LinkedIn activity.
Lusha impresses with its massive resource pool of 280M+ verified B2B contacts for global scaling. Lusha highlights high deliverability, claiming 85% phone and 98% email accuracy. CASTANET concentrates on automating LinkedIn actions and exporting profile details discovered during prospecting campaigns. It does not provide an external database of 280M+ contacts like Lusha does. Teams needing high-volume B2B contact enrichment across various channels should leverage Lusha’s scale. Teams primarily focused on LinkedIn pipeline generation will find CASTANET sufficient for data extraction. Lusha provides the raw material (data); CASTANET provides the automated factory (LinkedIn connector).
Lusha offers native CRM embeds; CASTANET relies heavily on Zapier for synchronization pathways.
CASTANET’s integration backbone relies deeply on Zapier to connect lead export to thousands of apps, including Slack and CRMs. It also supports simple lead profile exports via Google Sheets. Lusha offers robust native connections to tools like Salesforce, HubSpot, and Outreach for direct data enrichment and syncing. Lusha also includes MCP and API support for highly custom workflows. If you prefer pre-built, native connections like Salesforce hooks, Lusha is generally the smoother option. CASTANET requires reliance on Zapier for complex, multi-step CRM synchronizations. Both tools support Slack notifications for team alignment, but Lusha offers deeper, more integrated data flow for RevOps teams.
CASTANET uses fixed tiers; Lusha employs a confusing, usage-based credit system.
CASTANET offers clear, fixed monthly pricing across three tiers: Basic ($99), Sales Pro ($199), and Team ($399). Pricing includes fixed limits on LinkedIn campaign access. Lusha uses a usage-based credit system, where an email costs 1 credit and a phone number costs 10 credits. While Lusha has a free plan, the costs scale quickly and can be unpredictable. If budget predictability is essential, CASTANET’s fixed monthly fee is much easier to manage. Lusha's credit usage demands careful tracking to prevent unexpected costs. Monthly unused Lusha credits roll over up to twice the plan limit, but annual credits reset, adding complexity to Lusha's budgeting process.
CASTANET offers a risk-free 7-day trial; Lusha starts with a limited, sustained Free plan.
CASTANET offers a 7-day free trial along with a 100% satisfaction guarantee for new users. This lets users test the 24/7 automation flow and CRM export capabilities quickly. Lusha provides a Free plan that includes 70 credits per month, covering basic prospecting features and the browser extension. You get sustained, low-level access immediately. The CASTANET trial is ideal for short, intensive testing of automated processes before committing to $99/month. Lusha’s free tier lets solo users manage low-volume needs indefinitely. If you need to test full functionality quickly, the CASTANET 7-day trial is superior to Lusha’s credit-limited Free plan.
Choosing between CASTANET and Lusha means deciding between trust and massive scale. For most small to mid-sized sales teams, CASTANET is the recommended choice due to its stability and higher trust rating. Lusha offers a huge database, but its well-documented privacy risks are a significant detractor for many users. CASTANET absolutely dominates in the realm of reliable, automated LinkedIn flow. It gives you clear 'why fit' signals, using schools and groups to help tailor outreach effectively. CASTANET’s fixed pricing model also ensures your prospecting budget stays predictable and controlled every month. Lusha's superpower is its sheer volume and claimed data accuracy across 280 million B2B contacts. If your RevOps or Sales team focuses on high-volume lists and real-time buying signals, Lusha delivers that data. It also offers stronger native integration paths into CRMs like Salesforce. The deciding factor should be your risk tolerance regarding data provenance and compliance. CASTANET provides a steady, proven, and compliant automation experience. Lusha’s low 2.4 rating reflects major user anxiety over unsolicited calls and data handling practices. If you need trusted, automated LinkedIn lead flow, stick with CASTANET. If your priority is massive data enrichment and you can overlook serious user privacy concerns, Lusha can scale your contact lists aggressively.
Lusha offers a perpetual Free plan with 70 credits per month. CASTANET does not have a free plan and starts at $99/month. However, Lusha’s credit system can lead to higher costs if you rely heavily on phone numbers.
Lusha focuses on data access and timing via buying signals and extensions for LinkedIn. CASTANET specializes in 24/7 lead generation sequences and automated CRM exports through LinkedIn. CASTANET is purely focused on that process flow.
Lusha offers stronger native integration with major CRMs like Salesforce and HubSpot, plus API options. CASTANET relies heavily on Zapier and Google Sheets for lead profile exports and synchronization.
Based on user reviews, yes. CASTANET has a strong 4.3 rating with no significant privacy complaints listed. Lusha’s low 2.4 rating is highly attributed to user reports of privacy issues and unsolicited outreach.
Lusha provides access to a database offering phone numbers and emails for millions of contacts. CASTANET extracts available lead data from LinkedIn profiles during automated prospecting flow.
Lusha credits reset monthly, and on the monthly plan, unused credits roll over up to double your limit. CASTANET does not use a credit system; its fixed features reset monthly subscription periods.
Both tools have their strengths. Choose based on your specific needs.