Lusha vs Kaspr: LinkedIn Phone Data Chrome Extensions Compared for 2026

Lusha and Kaspr are the two most popular LinkedIn Chrome extensions for revealing phone numbers and email addresses directly on prospect profiles. Both install in seconds, both overlay contact data on LinkedIn, and both charge credits per contact reveal. But they differ meaningfully in pricing, European market coverage, data accuracy, and LinkedIn compliance risk.

Feature Comparison

Feature	Lusha	Kaspr
Primary data type	Phone + Email	Phone + Email
LinkedIn extension quality	✅ Fast, mature, reliable	✅ Fast, good European coverage
Sales Navigator support	✅ Full integration	✅ Full integration
Bulk extraction	✅ From LinkedIn search results	✅ From LinkedIn search results
CRM integrations	✅ HubSpot, Salesforce, Outreach	✅ HubSpot, Salesforce, Pipedrive
Automated workflows	❌ Limited	✅ LinkedIn automation sequences
European data coverage	Good	Strong — Kaspr is France-based
GDPR compliance tools	✅ Opt-out management	✅ GDPR-compliant data sourcing

Key Differentiators

Kaspr’s European Advantage: Kaspr was founded in France and has strong data coverage across European markets. For teams targeting EMEA prospects, Kaspr often returns phone numbers and emails that Lusha’s US-centric database misses.

Kaspr’s LinkedIn Automation: Unlike Lusha, Kaspr includes basic LinkedIn automation features — automated connection requests, profile visits, and follow-up messages. This turns Kaspr from a pure data tool into a lightweight LinkedIn outreach platform.

Lusha’s Data Maturity: Lusha has been in the market longer and has a larger community-verified dataset, particularly for North American contacts. For US-focused prospecting, Lusha’s phone accuracy typically exceeds Kaspr’s.

Pricing Comparison

Plan	Lusha	Kaspr
Free	50 credits/month	50 credits/month
Entry	$49/user — 160 credits	$49/user — 100 credits
Growth	$79/user — 400 credits	$79/user — 250 credits
Enterprise	Custom	Custom

Lusha provides more credits per dollar at every tier. However, Kaspr’s included LinkedIn automation features partially offset the credit volume difference — you get outreach capabilities that Lusha charges nothing for because it simply does not offer them.

LinkedIn Compliance Risk

Both tools carry LinkedIn compliance risk. LinkedIn’s Terms of Service prohibit automated data extraction, and both Lusha and Kaspr technically violate these terms. Practical enforcement varies:

• Account restriction risk increases with daily extraction volume. Both tools recommend staying below 80-100 profile views per day.
• Kaspr carries slightly higher risk due to its LinkedIn automation features (connection requests, messages), which LinkedIn monitors more aggressively than passive data extraction.
• Using Sales Navigator reduces risk for both tools compared to free LinkedIn accounts.

Recommendation

Choose Lusha for US-focused teams that prioritize phone data volume and accuracy for North American contacts. Better credit allocations and a more mature dataset for the American market.

Choose Kaspr for European-focused teams that want LinkedIn data extraction plus basic LinkedIn automation in one tool. Stronger EMEA coverage and built-in outreach features.

Choose Typpout to skip the LinkedIn extension model entirely. Instead of manually extracting data from LinkedIn profiles, Typpout’s AI agents identify buyers from real-time social signals, enrich contacts through multi-provider waterfall databases, and handle outreach autonomously. No Chrome extension, no LinkedIn rate limits, no credit anxiety.

Beyond LinkedIn scraping. Into autonomous prospecting. Try Typpout.