Skrapp Review

Skrapp does one thing: it turns a LinkedIn profile or a company domain into a verified business email address. It's a data tool, not a sending platform — it fills the top of the funnel and hands off to whatever sequencer you run. This review covers current 2026 pricing, where the plan structure gets expensive, and what a decade of public reviewer sentiment says about the part that actually matters: whether the addresses land.

Verdict at a glance

What kind of tool Skrapp is

Skrapp is an email-finding and verification platform built around LinkedIn as its primary discovery surface. The core loop: browse a profile, a Sales Navigator list, or a Recruiter search, click the extension, and Skrapp resolves the person to a business email and checks it before saving it to a list. You can also work the other direction — start from a company domain, or drop in a list of names and companies for bulk enrichment.

The vendor advertises over 200 million B2B contacts, 40 million company profiles, a 92% search success rate, and 97% verification accuracy. Those are published figures, not measured ones. As you'll see in the sentiment section, the reviewer base does not uniformly agree with them.

How it works in practice

The Chrome extension is what most people buy it for. It sits on LinkedIn, Sales Navigator, and Recruiter, and can walk multi-page result sets rather than making you click profile by profile — the shortest path from a saved search to a workable list. Reviewers consistently name this as the reason they picked Skrapp over a domain-first competitor.

The rest is conventional: an email finder that takes a name plus a domain, a website extractor that crawls for published addresses, and a bulk verifier for cleaning a list you already own before sending from a new domain.

Everything exports to CSV, and there are native Salesforce and HubSpot integrations. The REST API is Enterprise-only, which matters if you planned to wire Skrapp into an automated enrichment pipeline on a smaller budget — you cannot.

Skrapp pricing (2026)

The real math, which the pricing page does not spell out:

• Per-credit cost swings by roughly three times between tiers. Professional works out to about $0.020 per credit monthly, or $0.0145 committed annually; Enterprise lands near $0.007 monthly and $0.0052 annually. The upgrade is cheaper per contact only if you can actually consume 50,000 credits.
• There is no middle plan. A team needing 6,000 credits a month either buys Enterprise at nine times the price and wastes most of it, or splits the work across a second tool. This gap is the biggest cost trap in Skrapp's structure.
• Daily search caps can bind before your credits do. Professional allows 20 people searches, 10 company searches, and 5 AI searches per day, so a heavy prospecting week can hit the ceiling with allowance left over.
• The "Fair Credit Policy" excludes invalid results but not catch-alls. Not being billed for invalid addresses beats providers that charge for every lookup. Catch-all domains still consume credits, though, and a catch-all is an unconfirmed guess.
• Credits roll over month to month on paid plans, which softens uneven prospecting cycles.

One wrinkle worth knowing if you comparison-shop: Skrapp's G2 listing still advertises an older five-tier ladder — roughly $39 for 1,000 searches, $99 for 5,000, $189 for 20,000, and $299 for 50,000. That structure would have solved the mid-volume gap entirely. The figures above come from the live vendor pricing page and are the ones that apply; the G2 plan card appears to be stale. If a sales rep quotes you the old $99 or $189 tier, get it in writing before you pay.

What users say

Skrapp holds a 4.0 out of 5 on G2 across roughly 133 reviews, accessed July 2026. The star spread is the interesting part, because it isn't the near-unanimous five-star wall you often see on smaller listings: about 74 five-star and 38 four-star reviews sit against 10 three-star, one two-star, and 10 one-star. That's roughly 84% at four stars or better and a genuine 16% tail of dissatisfied users — a distribution that reads as an organically accumulated base rather than a curated one, which makes both halves of it more informative.

On the positive side, the themes are tight and repeat for years. Ease of use dominates: reviewers describe a shallow learning curve, a clean interface, and an extension that installs and works without configuration. The second theme is speed at volume — pulling an entire Sales Navigator result set into a list and exporting it, instead of clicking through profiles one at a time. Several 2024 reviewers from small businesses framed this as the whole value proposition, and a mid-market reviewer noted being able to work a thousand contacts in one pass. The third is price relative to the category: multiple reviewers who compared it against heavier sales-intelligence suites landed on Skrapp because it was cheap enough to expense without a procurement conversation. Bundled verification is the fourth — not having to buy a separate list-cleaning product is repeatedly called out as a reason to stay.

Support sentiment splits cleanly by era, and that split is worth reading carefully. The harshest complaints about support — unanswered tickets, multi-day silences, credits burned while waiting for a bug fix — cluster in 2018 and 2019 reviews. From roughly 2023 onward the pattern inverts: reviewers name responsive agents, next-day fixes, and in one case an assigned account manager. If you're weighing old one-star reviews about support, they appear to describe a company that no longer operates that way. That's a real improvement, and it's the clearest trajectory in the data.

The negative themes are dominated by one issue, and it has not gone away: email accuracy and bounce rates. This is the single most-cited complaint and it runs continuously from 2018 through 2024-2025 reviews. The pattern reviewers describe is consistent — Skrapp infers an address from a company's known email pattern, marks it verified or catch-all, and a meaningful share of those still bounce. One 2021 small-business reviewer reported pulling only 30-40 addresses from a 400-lead list, then watching a large fraction of the survivors bounce anyway. A 2018 reviewer put the finder's hit rate at "Less than 50% accuracy" and recommended layering a second validation tool on top. A 2024 mid-market reviewer cited high bounce volume as the reason for a two-star rating, while praising the price and ease of use in the same breath — a shape that recurs often enough to be the signature complaint: people like the product and don't trust the data.

G2's own per-feature scores corroborate this. Contact data accuracy scores 80% across 22 reviewers — the lowest-rated attribute in the entire feature breakdown — against 86-88% for lead building, search, segmentation, and CRM enrichment. Company data accuracy sits at 83% and platform reliability at 84%. In other words, the reviewer base rates Skrapp's workflow highly and its data quality noticeably lower, which is exactly the split the written reviews describe. Note that these subscores draw on only 12-22 respondents each, a small slice of the full base, so treat them as directional.

Who does this bite? Anyone sending cold at volume from a domain they care about. A 30-40% bounce rate on a new sending domain is a deliverability incident, not an inconvenience. The workaround reviewers converge on is straightforward and worth budgeting for: run Skrapp's output through an independent verifier before it touches a sequencer, and drop catch-alls rather than sending to them. Users prospecting mid-market and small firms report worse results than those targeting large, well-patterned companies — though one 2022 enterprise reviewer reported the opposite, striking out on eight consecutive Fortune-50 lookups, so the pattern isn't absolute.

Three smaller negative themes deserve mention. First, credit consumption on non-results: several 2024 reviewers noted that blank or unusable returns still drew down their balance, which sits awkwardly next to the Fair Credit Policy. Second, no phone numbers — Skrapp is email-only, and reviewers coming from Lusha or Apollo hit this immediately. A recruiter also flagged that Skrapp returns work addresses rather than personal ones, which suits B2B sales and actively hurts candidate outreach. Third, one 2024 small-business reviewer raised a genuine operational risk: the extension harvests from LinkedIn quickly, with no throttle control, and they considered that a LinkedIn account-restriction hazard. If your LinkedIn account is load-bearing for your pipeline, that's a real consideration.

On verification scope: the G2 rating, review count, and feature scores above are verified as of July 2026. Trustpilot and Capterra remain unverified — we found no accessible sample with meaningful volume — and the 4.8/5 Chrome Web Store figure Skrapp cites on its own site is vendor-reported and measures the browser add-on rather than data quality.

Pros and cons

Pros

• Genuinely free entry tier with 50 credits — you can measure bounce rates before paying
• Strong LinkedIn, Sales Navigator, and Recruiter coverage, including multi-page extraction; the most-praised feature in the review base
• Verification is built in rather than sold as a separate product
• Credits roll over, and invalid results are not billed
• Cheap by category standards at the Professional tier, and reviewers rate the workflow features 86-88%
• Support quality has visibly improved since the 2018-2019 complaint cluster

Cons

• Deliverability is the dominant complaint across 2018-2025 reviews; contact data accuracy is the lowest-scoring attribute on G2 at 80%
• No plan between 2,000 and 50,000 credits — the upgrade is a nine-fold jump
• API access is locked to Enterprise
• Daily search caps limit throughput independently of credits
• Catch-alls consume credits, and several reviewers report blank results drawing down balance too
• Email only — no phone numbers, and work addresses only, which rules out most recruiting use

Skrapp alternatives

• Hunter — the closest direct comparison; stronger domain-search workflow and a well-documented API on lower tiers.
• Apollo.io — database plus sequencer in one; far broader, and heavier to operate.
• Wiza — LinkedIn-first like Skrapp, positioned specifically on verified-only exports.
• Snov.io — similar LinkedIn-first finder with sending built in.
• Findymail — pricier per contact, positioned on verification quality and low bounce rates; the natural upgrade if bounces are your problem.
• Dropcontact — GDPR-focused and algorithmic rather than database-driven; different accuracy profile on EU contacts.
• Lusha — adds phone numbers, which Skrapp doesn't sell, at a higher price point.

Who should use Skrapp — and who shouldn't

Good fit: SDRs, recruiters, and founders whose prospecting already happens inside LinkedIn and who want a cheap, extension-driven path from search results to a workable list. The reviewer base skews heavily toward small businesses under 50 employees and mid-market teams, and that's where satisfaction is highest. It also works well as a list-building layer in front of a verifier you already pay for.

Poor fit: anyone sending cold at volume who plans to trust Skrapp's verification without a second pass — the bounce complaints are too consistent and too recent to wave off. Also: teams building automated enrichment pipelines on a small budget, since the API sits behind the $349 tier; anyone needing 5,000 to 20,000 credits a month, who overpays either way; recruiters who need personal rather than work addresses; teams that need phone numbers; and anyone prospecting heavily outside LinkedIn, where a LinkedIn-first index is the wrong shape of database.