Our data
Every vendor in this category quotes a headline accuracy percentage, and none of them will tell you how it was measured. We would rather show you exactly how each field is produced and let you judge it. Where a value is a model rather than an observation, the record says so.
Fields per record
65
Across 9 groups, every one source-stamped
Signal history
13 readings
Weekly, rolling 90-day window
Refresh cadence
Weekly
Signals recomputed; identity re-verified on a 90-day cycle
Staleness threshold
90 days
Older values are flagged in the interface, not served as current
Detection methods
7
Named on every technographic field
Regions
US, EU
Data residency selectable on Enterprise
Confidence tiers
Three tiers, printed on every field.
The number beside a value is not a vague quality rating. It maps to how the value was obtained, and the interface names the method.
Confirmed
90–100The company stated it in a document we can point to.
- A job posting naming the ERP by product name
- A published case study or press release
- An RFP document or requirements doc
- The company's own website or partner directory listing
Detected
70–89A technical fingerprint we observed directly.
- MX and DNS records identifying a mail or payroll provider
- Script and tag fingerprints on the public site
- Login subdomains and vendor-hosted endpoints
Inferred
40–69A reasoned estimate from adjacent evidence. Treated as a hypothesis, not a fact.
- Revenue modelled from property count and market ADR
- Team structure implied by hiring patterns
- A gap flagged because peers at this size have the category and this account shows no trace of it
What we will not do