Person enrichment API benchmark 2026: Coresignal, Nyne, Crustdata, Fiber and People Data Labs

Coresignal and Nyne tied for first in the person enrichment test. Each matched the right person for 100 of 100 people. Crustdata was next at 99%, then Fiber at 98% and People Data Labs at 92%. The top four sit within 2 points of each other, so the real gap in this test is between People Data Labs and everyone else: 8 points between it and the leaders.

Person enrichment takes a few identifying details about someone and returns the profile that belongs to them. The test was graded against answers that were already known, so a match counts only when the provider returned the right person and not just a person.

The short version:

• Coresignal and Nyne tie at 100%. Crustdata is one person behind at 99%, and Fiber is two behind at 98%.
• People Data Labs is last at 92%, which is 8 misses in 100 people. The four others missed between 0 and 2.
• The ranking changes on company data. The same five providers scored between 79% and 93% there, and Nyne went from first to last.

Which API matches the right person most often?

Coresignal and Nyne, both without a single miss. Each matched all 100 people in the panel. Crustdata matched 99, Fiber 98 and People Data Labs 92.

With a panel of 100, one person is one point. Crustdata and Fiber are one and two people behind the leaders, which is too small a gap to call a difference in quality on a list of this size. People Data Labs is the exception. It missed 8 people, four times as many as Fiber and eight times as many as Crustdata.

Is the order the same for company data?

No. The same five providers took the company enrichment test, and the order is different. Crustdata led that test at 93%, Fiber was second at 92%, Coresignal third at 89%, People Data Labs fourth at 87% and Nyne last at 79%. The company enrichment benchmark has the full breakdown.

Every provider scored lower on companies than on people. Nyne moves the most. It is joint first on people at 100% and last on companies at 79%. Crustdata, Fiber and People Data Labs stay close to their person score, with company results of 93%, 92% and 87%.

If you enrich both people and companies, this is the useful part of the benchmark. A provider that is perfect on one panel can be the weakest on the other. The two tests used different panels of 100 and measure different things, so compare the order and not the raw points.

How was this benchmark measured?

The person test used a fixed panel with known answers and graded every response against them.

• Panel. 100 people whose correct profile was already known.
• What counts as a hit. The provider returned the right person. A wrong person and an empty response both count as a miss.
• Same input. Each API was called on the same panel, and the score is hits divided by the full 100.
• Date. The run was on 3 September 2026.
• Providers. Coresignal, Nyne, Crustdata, Fiber and People Data Labs took the test.

There are limits. The panel is 100 people, so a single result moves a score by a full point and small gaps near the top should not be over-read. The test measures whether the right person came back. It says nothing about price, speed, or how many fields each profile contained. The methodology page explains how the separate APIbenchmarks Index scores documentation, reliability, ecosystem and access.

Why is People Data Labs behind on person matching?

The data shows that it missed more people than the others. It does not show why. This test records a match or a miss for each person, and it does not record the reason for a miss, so any explanation would be a guess. What can be said is that People Data Labs returned the right person for 92 of 100, and it was also fourth of five on company data at 87%, so it sits in the lower half in both tests.

It is worth keeping the size of the gap in view. A 92% match rate still means 92 right answers in 100. For a team that can review the misses by hand, the difference between 92 and 100 may matter less than price or fields returned. For a pipeline that writes straight into a CRM, 8 wrong or empty rows per 100 is a real cost.

How do these providers compare on price and API access?

Accuracy is one input. The APIbenchmarks Index also records how each API is sold and how easy it is to start using. Four of the five providers are in the data enrichment index. Nyne is not.

The index and the match rates measure different things and do not line up. Coresignal has the best person result and a 75.2 index score. Crustdata has the highest index score of the four, 95.7, and sits one person behind the leaders on person matching. People Data Labs scores 84.9 in the index and is last here. See the full scores on the Coresignal, Crustdata, Fiber and People Data Labs pages, or compare two directly, for example Coresignal vs Crustdata or Crustdata vs People Data Labs.

The bottom line on each provider

• Coresignal. Joint first on people at 100%, third on companies at 89%. Sold as a monthly credit subscription with a 7-day trial.
• Nyne. Joint first on people at 100%, last on companies at 79%. The largest fall between the two tests.
• Crustdata. 99% on people and first on companies at 93%. Stays near its person score on companies.
• Fiber. 98% on people and 92% on companies. Second on companies, fourth on people.
• People Data Labs. 92% on people and 87% on companies. Last on people, fourth on companies.

How to benchmark person enrichment providers yourself

These results come from one panel of 100 people. Your records may lean toward a region, an industry or a seniority level where the order is different. Take a few hundred people from your own CRM where you already know the correct profile, send the same list to each provider you are considering, and count only exact matches. Count an empty response as a miss and divide by the whole list, not by the number of answers. If you also enrich companies, run the same exercise on them, because this benchmark shows the order can change. The technographics benchmark shows how a shared answer key can be built when no single source is trusted.

FAQ

Which API matches the right person most often? Coresignal and Nyne tied, each matching 100 of 100 people. Crustdata matched 99%, Fiber 98% and People Data Labs 92%.

Which person enrichment API is the most accurate? On this panel, Coresignal and Nyne, with no misses. Crustdata and Fiber were within 2 points of them. People Data Labs was 8 points behind the leaders.

Is Crustdata or People Data Labs better for person data? Crustdata matched 99% of people and People Data Labs matched 92%, a gap of 7 people in 100. On company data the order held, with Crustdata at 93% and People Data Labs at 87%.

Does a provider that wins on people also win on companies? Not always. Nyne matched 100% of people and 79% of companies, the lowest company score of the five. Crustdata led companies at 93% and was third on people at 99%.

How is a match counted in this benchmark? Each person in the panel had a known correct profile. A provider scores a match only when it returns that person. A wrong person and an empty response both count as misses, and the score is divided by all 100 people.