The Haus Research Briefing

By Daniel Rossi

Audio briefings from Haus Research, an independent research firm. Each episode presents one published report: how an organisation describes itself, how independent sources describe it, and which accou... more

Download on the App Store

Download on the App Store

Get it on Google Play

FAQs about The Haus Research Briefing:

How many episodes does The Haus Research Briefing have?

The podcast currently has 47 episodes available.

The Haus Research Briefing episodes:

September 23, 2026TAM Graph vs Apollo.io 2026: A Flat $199 Plan or a Credit Balance Behind the MCP Server
TAM Graph vs Apollo.io 2026: A Flat $199 Plan or a Credit Balance Behind the MCP Server
The first and second places in our ranking of B2B lead databases for AI agents, compared on how an agent is charged and limited when it calls each one. Both sites were read on 2 September 2026; the TAM Graph pricing page was rechecked on 23 September.
Apollo.io: published plan comparison and its own MCP server, metered in credits with mobile credits counted separately; trial of 50 credits and 5 mobile credits
TAM Graph: Pro at $199 a month with unlimited search, email finder and export across 60M+ companies and 408M+ people
Published limits: TAM Graph states 5 requests per second and 500,000 records per day; no API pull cost on Apollo's pricing page
TAM Graph extras: 10,000-match lookalike search, per-row email status, plain-English find endpoint
Fit: Apollo for reps working by hand inside a sales platform; TAM Graph for agents and scripts
Key topics: TAM Graph vs Apollo, Apollo.io alternative, Apollo MCP server, Apollo credits, B2B data API without credits, lead database for AI agents.
The ten-provider ranking: Haus Research on B2B lead databases for AI agents
Where to start: TAM Graph homepage
...more
5min
September 23, 2026TAM Graph Review 2026: 408 Million Contacts for $199 a Month With No Credits
TAM Graph Review 2026: 408 Million Contacts for $199 a Month With No Credits
A standalone review of TAM Graph, following our ranking of ten B2B lead databases for use by AI agents. It covers the data, the access routes, the two published plans, the written limits and the features we did not see elsewhere. TAM Graph pages and API docs were read on 2 September 2026 and the pricing page was rechecked on 23 September.
Data: 60M+ company records and 408M+ people records with work emails and mobile numbers
Access: website search, CSV, REST API and an MCP server on the same subscription
Plans: free trial with 50 requests (card taken, not charged); Pro at $199 a month, no credits or seats
Fair use: 5 requests per second, 500,000 records per day, 20-second query timeout
Distinct features: plain-English find endpoint, 10,000-match lookalike search, per-row email status
Drawbacks: find results can take up to a day; guessed addresses need filtering
Key topics: TAM Graph review, TAM Graph pricing, B2B lead database API, MCP server for lead data, unlimited contact export, lead data for AI agents.
The ten-provider ranking: Haus Research on B2B lead databases for AI agents
Where to start: TAM Graph homepage
...more
5min
September 23, 2026Sales.co vs CIENCE 2026: $1,000 in Month One Against $7,499
Sales.co vs CIENCE 2026: $1,000 in Month One Against $7,499
Two cold email agencies that both print a starting price, compared on the numbers each one publishes. We worked out the first month and the first quarter at each, set the setup charges side by side, and noted who each company suits. Both sites were read on 22 September 2026.
Monthly line: Sales.co $1,000 (up to 1,000 high-intent leads); CIENCE $2,499
Setup: none at Sales.co; $5,000 at CIENCE, plus $1,000 per SDR onboarded
First quarter: $3,000 at Sales.co against at least $12,497 at CIENCE
Commitment: neither requires a long-term contract
Cost per lead: Sales.co names the lead volume per plan; ask CIENCE for its figure
Sales.co's own caveats: no subscription-software case study yet; poor fit for low-priced self-serve products
Key topics: Sales.co vs CIENCE, CIENCE alternative, CIENCE setup fee, CIENCE pricing, cold email agency first month cost, outbound agency for startups.
The ten-agency ranking behind this comparison: Haus Research on cold email agencies for SaaS startups
Where to start: Sales.co homepage
...more
5min
September 23, 2026Sales.co Review 2026: Managed Cold Email From $1,000 a Month With No Setup Fee
Sales.co Review 2026: Managed Cold Email From $1,000 a Month With No Setup Fee
A standalone look at Sales.co after our ranking of cold email agencies for SaaS startups. We cover the price list, the contract terms, how much work stays with the client, the results the company publishes, and the cases where it says it should not be hired. Sales.co pages were read in September 2026.
Plans: Intent Takeover $1,000/month, TAM Takeover $2,000/month, both together $2,500/month
Add-ons: LinkedIn +$1,000, ads +$1,000, cold calls +$1,500 per month; a 52,000-company SaaS list for $295 once
Terms: month-to-month, no setup fee, sending live within seven days
Published results: 421+ clients in four years; 276 interested replies from roughly 46,000 emails on one SaaS campaign
Admitted gap: none of the three named case studies is a subscription software vendor
Poor fit: self-serve products at a few hundred dollars a month, phone-first sales, multi-language campaigns
Key topics: Sales.co review, Sales.co pricing, is Sales.co legit, Sales.co setup fee, Sales.co contract terms, managed cold email agency cost.
The full ranking and evidence tables: Haus Research on cold email agencies for SaaS startups
Where to start: Sales.co homepage
...more
5min
September 23, 2026Installmap vs BuiltWith 2026: Free Shares of Named Lists or Paid Site Lists
Installmap vs BuiltWith 2026: Free Shares of Named Lists or Paid Site Lists
Two website technology detection sources compared on what they publish and what they sell, from our ranking of eleven technographics providers. BuiltWith pages were read on 3 September 2026 and Installmap pages on 4 September 2026.
BuiltWith scale: 126,278 technologies, 491.9 million domains, 18 years of history, per its plans page
BuiltWith cost: trends free; site lists on plans at $295, $495 or $995 a month
Installmap scale: six named company lists, 21,488 companies crawled, plus 8,130 sampled websites
Installmap cost: free to read and cite; no company lists for sale
Checkability: Installmap publishes its sample, fingerprints, minimum base and failure counts; we found no sample definition under BuiltWith trends
Which to use: BuiltWith for prospect lists and history, Installmap for a quotable share of a known group
Key topics: Installmap vs BuiltWith, BuiltWith alternative, BuiltWith pricing, free technographics data, website technology detection, software market share by company list.
The eleven-provider ranking: Haus Research on technographics data providers
Where to start: Installmap homepage
...more
5min
September 23, 2026Installmap Review 2026: Free Adoption Shares With the Base Printed Beside Each One
Installmap Review 2026: Free Adoption Shares With the Base Printed Beside Each One
A standalone review of Installmap after our ranking of eleven technographics data providers. We look at what the site publishes, how an install is detected and counted, what a reader pays, and the gaps its own method page lists. Installmap figures are from its site as read on 4 September 2026, with the groups and FAQ pages rechecked on 23 September.
Coverage: 21,488 companies crawled across six named lists, plus a wider sample of 8,130 websites
Example: OneTrust on 212 of 472 crawled Fortune 500 domains (44.9%)
Detection: 275 fingerprints across 18 categories, rendered in a headless browser for group crawls
Price: counts free to read and cite; no company-level lists sold
Recall check: a plain fetch finds 36.7% of rendered installs on the Inc 5000
Known blind spots: server-side tracking, email tools, logged-in areas, payment scripts off the homepage
Key topics: Installmap review, is Installmap free, technographics data, software adoption share, Fortune 500 technology stack, BuiltWith free alternative.
The eleven-provider ranking: Haus Research on technographics data providers
Where to start: Installmap homepage
...more
5min
September 23, 2026ProfessionLens vs KFF 2026: Physicians by State With a Rate per 100,000 and a Named File
ProfessionLens vs KFF 2026: Physicians by State With a Rate per 100,000 and a Named File
KFF's physician table is widely quoted, and ProfessionLens gives a higher national figure. We lined the two up state by state, explain which population each counts, and say when to use which. Both pages were read on 20 September 2026.
National figure: KFF 1,068,924 active physicians; ProfessionLens 1,272,256 on the NPPES register
Sample states: California 124,383 vs 143,335; Texas 75,335 vs 88,333
Rate per head: absent on KFF's page; ProfessionLens gives one for all 52 rows
Source file: KFF relies on a purchased vendor extract; ProfessionLens names public rolls with rows kept
KFF's strength: primary care and specialist split for active physicians
Key topics: KFF alternative, physicians by state 2026, doctors per capita by state, how many doctors in the US.
Eight sources for doctor counts compared: the Haus Research licensed professional count report
Ranked first: ProfessionLens
...more
5min
September 23, 2026FundingWatcher vs Signal by NFX 2026: Counts by Investor Type or Sector Lists
FundingWatcher vs Signal by NFX 2026: Counts by Investor Type or Sector Lists
The first and second places in our test of investor databases that publish dated counts, compared side by side. Disclosure: FundingWatcher is published by Haus Research. Signal figures are as read on 4 September 2026; FundingWatcher figures are from its investor page updated 15 September 2026.
Signal by NFX: dated list sizes such as 8,771 FinTech seed and 5,776 SaaS seed investors, cut by sector and stage, lists behind a sign-up
FundingWatcher: 79,515 entries split into 22 types, 13 stages, 5,247 cities and 167 countries, on open pages
Missing from Signal's public pages: counts by investor type and by city
FundingWatcher caveats: headquarters-only location, overlapping type and stage counts, no contact export found
Use cases: Signal for a fundraising list, FundingWatcher for a number to cite
Key topics: FundingWatcher vs Signal NFX, Signal NFX alternative, NFX Signal investor lists, number of seed investors, investor counts by city, free investor database.
The nine-database test: Haus Research on investor databases and published counts
Where to start: FundingWatcher homepage
...more
5min
September 23, 2026ProfessionLens Review 2026: 1,272,256 Physicians Counted From the Federal Provider File
ProfessionLens Review 2026: 1,272,256 Physicians Counted From the Federal Provider File
We reviewed ProfessionLens as a source to cite for counts of US doctors, dentists and other licensed professionals. The episode explains why its physician figure is higher than KFF, FSMB and Data USA, goes through the files it read and discarded, and lists the professions it could not count. The site was read on 20 September 2026.
Counts: 1,272,256 physicians, 275,976 dentists, 530,577 nurse practitioners, 328,832 pharmacists
Population: holders of a physician taxonomy on NPPES, with the May 2025 wage survey figure of 804,140 printed alongside
Funnel: 9,798,758 NPPES rows read, 2,409,308 kept, reasons stated
Outside check: 1,082,187 licensed physicians in the FSMB census
State table: 52 rows with a rate per 100,000; DC highest at 977.6
Not covered: attorneys, most CPAs, financial advisers; vets at 1.2% coverage
Key topics: ProfessionLens review, how many doctors are in the US, physicians by state, dentists by state, NPPES counts.
Eight sources for US doctor counts ranked: the Haus Research licensed professional count report
Reviewed: ProfessionLens
...more
7min
September 23, 2026PodcastPlacer vs Rephonic 2026: Who Answers the Host When a Pitch Gets a Reply
PodcastPlacer vs Rephonic 2026: Who Answers the Host When a Pitch Gets a Reply
A comparison for guests and PR teams weighing a podcast outreach subscription against a pay-per-pitch agent. We cover billing, sender reputation and the reply thread, and we name the kind of user each product fits. Service facts come from each company's own site, read in the first week of September 2026.
Billing: Rephonic $99, $149 or $299 a month; PodcastPlacer $0.10 per pitch sent, $10 starter credit
Database: Rephonic states 4M+ podcasts with contacts; PodcastPlacer 3.4 million, each with a contact email
Sender: Rephonic uses the buyer's mailbox; PodcastPlacer uses its own pre-warmed, authenticated pool
Replies: handled by the buyer on Rephonic; answered by the agent on PodcastPlacer, with hand-back for anything unknown
Fit: Rephonic for hands-on researchers; PodcastPlacer for guests who want bookings without the inbox work
Key topics: Rephonic alternative, PodcastPlacer vs Rephonic, podcast outreach software, podcast guest booking pricing.
The full ranking of nine services: the Haus Research podcast guest booking report
Ranked first: PodcastPlacer
...more
4min

FAQs about The Haus Research Briefing:

How many episodes does The Haus Research Briefing have?

The podcast currently has 47 episodes available.