Hunter vs. Informatica Cloud Data Quality vs. Skrapp

The scenario we most commonly use Hunter for is to quickly find and retrieve contact email information. Phone numbers are an added bonus, but they tend to only be available for contacts in the US. SDRs have the extension in order to confirm or to help them "guess" as to what a contact's email address might be. This speeds up our prospecting time considerably. Where Hunter falls short is not being flexible where companies have more than one email format.

Incentivized

For effective data collaboration, systematic verification of customer information, and address, among others, Informatica Data Quality is a fruitful application to consider. Besides, Informatica Data Quality controls quality through a cleansing process, giving the company a professional outline of candid data profiling and reputable analytics. Finally, Informatica Data Quality allows the simplistic navigation of content, with a dashboard that supports predictability.

Incentivized

• Hunter provides a quick and easy way to look up the email format for any company using the free Google Chrome extension.
• Hunter allows you to upload a bulk list of emails and verify them easily.
• Hunter shows where verified emails were found on web pages and PDF documents. This shows that the emails were published by trusted sources.

Incentivized

• The matching algorithms in IDQ are very powerful if you understand the different types that they offer (e.g., Hamming Distance, Jaro, Bigram, etc..). We had to play around with it to see which best suit our own needs of identifying and eliminating duplicate customers. Setting up the whole process (e.g., creating the KeyGenerator Transformation, setting up the matching threshold, etc..) can be somewhat time consuming and a challenge if you don't first standardize your data.
• The integration with PowerCenter is great if you have both. You can either import your mappings directly to PowerCenter or to an XML file. The only downside is that some of the transformations are unique to IDQ, so you are not really able to edit them once in PowerCenter.
• The standardizer transformation was key in helping us standardize our customer data (e.g., names, addresses, etc..). It was helpful due to having create a reference table containing the standardized value and the associated unstandardized values. What was great was that if you used Informatica Analyst, a business analyst could login and correct any of the values.

• Hunter is only as valuable as the information it is able to scrape from the internet. If a company has not listed any email addresses online, then Hunter is not going to be able to find it.
• Sometimes Hunter is only able to identify non-personal-specific email addresses (ex: info @, support@, etc.). This makes it difficult to identify personnel emails
• Sometimes companies will have different email domains that Hunter is not able to correlate. For example, when searching for an email address at Lead.com, Hunter is not able to point to ParentCompany.com email addresses that would be more useful.

Incentivized

• Several partnerships diminishing the value of technologies
• Unable to get list of objects from Repository (like sources & targets) that don't have any dependency
• Scheduling: The built-in scheduling tool has many constraints such as handling Unix/VB scripts etc. Most enterprises use third party tools for this.

As pointed out earlier, due all the robust features IDQ has, our use f the product is successful and stable. IDQ is being used in multiple sources (from CRM application and in batch mode). As this is an iterative process, we are looking to improve our system efficiency using IDQ.

I think the features are good, but it makes my brain hurt (and feel overtaxed) when I have to jump between searching by name and domain and then searching via a specific email to verify. I wish I could do all of that from one landing page, one über search bar.

Incentivized

Easy to use not only for developers but also business users

Incentivized

The application works well except an occasional error out while using the system. It usually gets fixed when restarting the Infa server

Incentivized

Performance works just fine. It was able to load 200+ business terms, 150+ DQ automation, etc. very well.

Incentivized

Hunter is a good all in one solution, which hasnt always been the case as it used to be a daa only solution. However, other tools like lemlist as slightly more user friendly and make it so simple to build and launch multi-channel campaigns , and do this slightly better than Hunter.

Incentivized

IDQ is used by a department at my organisation to ensure and enhance the data quality.
The usage was started with address standardization and now it had been brought to altogether a next level of quality check where it fixes duplicates, junk characters, standardize the names, streets, product descriptions.
In the past we had issues mainly with duplicate customers and products and this were affecting the sales projection and estimates.

Scalability works as expected and it is truly an enterprise system.

Incentivized

• Definitely Hunter has built lead lists for our clients in a very fast way for our clients.
• It has managed to cut the times of preparation of lead lists in more than 200% of the time compared to other traditional ways.
• Our clients can now have tons of leads and deliver contents in a faster way to validate these prospects.

Incentivized

• Integration with tools like PowerCenter helped faster delivery of product, and at the same time conversion
• Reduce overall project cost due to bad data , bad quality, exceptions identified nearing go-live and post production
• Employee efficiency is increased exponentially due to more automated, customized tool