Double vs. Persana AI

We find Persana AI effective for outreach. One of the benefits is the speed with which we can now launch campaigns. Earlier, preparing prospect lists, enriching data, and gathering context used to take time. With Persana AI, this process has become faster for sure. Building the audience campaigns have also became quite easier for us. The tool isn’t really built for ROI calculation, and that’s something we’ve noticed in our usage.

Incentivized

• They have accurate lead enrichment. This reduces manual research and saves time.
• The insights they provide are quite helpful while reaching out. This has helped us a lot in response rate
• Seamless CRM integration.
• Segmentation and targeting have also become much easier.

Incentivized

• Some niche industries and regional markets are not covered.
• UI could be more better. We find a bit difficult in filtering large datasets.
• AI generated suggestions can be better. We find them quite generic. They can be more engaging and energetic.

Incentivized

Some features, like filtering and finding leads, are pretty simple, but others take a bit of time to figure out. For someone new, the UI can feel a little overwhelming at first. Once you spend some time with it, it gets smoother, but it’s not as easy or intuitive as it could be.

Incentivized

Both the tools offer similar features for things like data enrichment and prospecting. But the main reason to go with Persana AI was cost. Even though Clay is also a strong tool, Persana AI gave us a good balance of functionality and price, so we decided to go with it.

Incentivized

• Positive Impact - Speed and efficiency on the revenue generation teams
• Higher response rate due to personalisation

Incentivized