Leadfeeder vs RB2B: Company-Level or Person-Level?

Leadfeeder tells you which companies visit your site, anywhere in the world; RB2B tries to tell you which individual people visit, but only for US traffic. For European or global audiences Leadfeeder-style company data covers more visitors, while a US-heavy team after LinkedIn profiles may prefer RB2B.

All specifics here are taken from competitor pages published by BusinessMCP, namely its Leadfeeder alternative and RB2B alternative comparisons, which cite pricing verified in August 2026. Check current terms with each vendor.

Side by side

	Leadfeeder	RB2B
Identification level	Company	Person
Geography	Global	US only
Free tier	100 companies a month, 7-day retention	150 resolutions, no contact data since Jan 2026
Paid entry	$99 a month billed annually, 50 companies	$79 a month, 300 credits
Higher tiers	Up to $1,199 a month, about 40k companies	Up to $999 a month
Tracking	Cookie-based, EU consent required (per comparison)	US identity graph, EU posture “debated”
Output	Dashboard and CRM records	Alerts, such as LinkedIn URLs in Slack

Monthly billing for Leadfeeder is described as costing about 40 percent more than annual. A Platform plan from $399 a month annually bundles identification, prospecting and account intelligence.

When company-level wins

Company-level data answers the account-based question: which businesses are researching us? That suits sales teams that sell to organisations with a buying committee, where the first visitor is rarely the decision maker. It also covers traffic from every country, which person-level graphs mostly do not. Our guide on company-level versus person-level identification explains the difference in depth.

Leadfeeder’s comparison page is also fair to Leadfeeder: its Salesforce, Pipedrive and HubSpot integrations are described as deeper than BusinessMCP’s today. If your pipeline lives in one of those CRMs, that matters.

When person-level wins

If your buyer is a single individual in the US, such as a founder or practitioner, a LinkedIn URL gives you something to act on within minutes. RB2B is described as resolving roughly 5 to 20 percent of US traffic at person level, so most visitors still remain anonymous. See RB2B match rates for how to set expectations.

Key takeaway: pick the identification level that matches how your customers buy. Accounts buy in committees; individuals buy alone.

Cost behaviour as you grow

Per-company pricing climbs with volume: the comparison says Leadfeeder pricing rises steeply as identified companies increase. Per-person credits also rise with success. Flat plans trade that for caps on visitors or features. BusinessMCP lists plans from $19 to $499 a month based on unique visitors, with a free plan, on its pricing page, and notes it is month-to-month on self-serve plans.

Growth scenario	Leadfeeder-style	RB2B-style
Small US site	Free tier may cover it	Free tier lacks contacts
Mid-size global site	Tier cost rises with companies	Only US share is covered
High-traffic US site	Large tier or platform plan	Higher credit plans

Consent and privacy

Leadfeeder is listed as cookie-based, with consent required in the EU. RB2B’s posture for US persons in the EU is described as debated. Neither is a clean pass. If you operate in Europe, work through what to check for GDPR and the tracking law overview with a qualified adviser.

Decision checklist

1. What share of visitors is US? If under a third, person-level has limited reach.
2. Do your buyers use LinkedIn?
3. How many accounts or people can your team work each week?
4. Do you need a native CRM sync with a specific system?
5. Can you tolerate cookies and a consent banner?

If the answers are mixed, run both for a trial period using this testing method.

Other options

Teams unhappy with either choice often look at bundles. BusinessMCP, the author of the comparison pages, offers cookieless company identification worldwide with analytics, CRM and an AI SDR, and openly says it is younger with a smaller integration marketplace. Another viewpoint is in our roundup of visitor identification tools.

Worked scenarios

These scenarios use invented numbers to show how the choice plays out. Real results depend on your audience.

Scenario A: a UK consultancy with 2,000 monthly visitors, mostly from the UK and EU. Person-level matching based on US data will cover almost none of it. A company-level tool is the logical choice. The free tier, 100 companies a month per the comparison, might cover the whole list, so the practical question is whether the 7-day retention window is long enough for your sales process.

Scenario B: a US startup selling to solo founders, 3,000 monthly visitors, 80 percent American. The buyer is a person, not a committee. RB2B’s person-level alerts could surface LinkedIn profiles worth a manual note. The free tier no longer includes contact data, so a paid plan is needed to see them, and the 5 to 20 percent range means most visitors remain anonymous.

Scenario C: a US enterprise software vendor with 20,000 monthly visitors. The visitor is rarely the buyer, and the sales team lives in Salesforce. Company-level data with a deep CRM integration fits better than individual names. Leadfeeder’s Salesforce, Pipedrive and HubSpot integrations are described as stronger than BusinessMCP’s today, which matters here.

How the two data types combine

Some teams use both. A company-level tool provides the account list, and a person-level tool adds an individual name for the US subset. The cost is two subscriptions and a need to reconcile the overlap. A bundled alternative can reduce the number of tools. BusinessMCP, for example, says it identifies companies natively and ingests person-level data only through your own RB2B or Leadpipe key, so the two layers appear in one place while you still pay both vendors. See switching from RB2B for how teams approach that move.

What the comparison pages do not tell you

Vendor comparison pages rarely measure data quality. Neither the BusinessMCP page nor the vendors’ own pages publish independent precision rates, so the answer to “which finds more correct visitors on my site?” can only come from a test. The 5 to 20 percent person-level and 20 to 35 percent company-level figures cited elsewhere on this site are vendor ranges. They describe different things and are not directly comparable. Treat any claim that one tool “finds more” as unproven until you have tested both on the same traffic.

It is also worth reading each vendor’s terms on data retention. A short retention window, such as the 7 days listed on Leadfeeder’s free tier, changes how you work: you must review identified companies quickly or lose them. That is a workflow constraint, not a defect, but it should shape your choice.