Compare Crunchbase pricing, features and alternatives

Multiples is a modern, comprehensive financial data platform built for finance professionals, VC/PE firms and M&A advisors. It provides valuation data, public market comparables (including consensus estimates), funding rounds and M&A data.

Crunchbase is built for sales teams, founders, and recruiters tracking market trends, discovering new startups, and researching investor portfolios. It is not an institutional-quality platform. It does not have licensed public comps data like Multiples has, its M&A coverage is limited. Crunchbase does not have valuation multiples data.

Multiples and Crunchbase serve different financial workflows. Choose Multiples for financial/valuation modeling, public comps, VC multiples and M&A data. Choose Crunchbase as a cheap solution for startup discovery, lead generation, and tracking general funding rounds.

PitchBook and Crunchbase are often compared, but they serve completely different buyers. Crunchbase is a simple startup database for discovery. PitchBook is an enterprise private markets platform used by funds, banks and corporate development teams.

PitchBook's reported pricing is at $25,000-$40,000 per year with a 2-3 seat minimum, annual contracts only. That is roughly 40 times the price of a Crunchbase seat, which says a lot about how different these platforms are.

PitchBook was founded in 2007 in Seattle and fully acquired by Morningstar in 2016 for $225 million.

Upgrade to PitchBook when you need higher quality data, public/private valuations, LP/fund data or email database. If your use case is valuation only, you can also check out Multiples, that includes both public and private valuation data, without an expensive price tag of PitchBook.

CB Insights and Crunchbase both focus predominantly on tech, but sell to (very) different budgets. Crunchbase is a $49-$199 simple SaaS tool, CB Insights is an enterprise research product reported at $40,000-$100,000 per year, targeting large investment firms, banks and government institutions.

CB Insights sells finished research on top of the extensive data. It produces proprietary market maps, analyst briefs and Mosaic scores - an algorithmic health rating for startups across 12 million tracked companies. The product also includes Browser Analyst for on-page company insights, a Strategy Terminal for deeper database access, and AI chat tools.

Choose CB Insights for a much more sophisticated "data experience", and if the research is important to you. For basic underlying funding and transaction data, Crunchbase covers most of it at a fraction of the price.

Tracxn and Crunchbase are both tech-focused databases, but Tracxn is a much more comprehensive one (especially across M&A data). It also adds an "analyst layer": 3M+ tracked companies, curated into 1,800+ feeds by sector, theme and geography.

Its coverage is deepest in India, where companies file financials with the registrar. Tracxn often has revenue and profit figures for companies Crunchbase lists with just a name and a website.

A single-user plan is reported at around $550 per month, team licenses at $6,500-$15,000 per year - well above Crunchbase, but below the legacy enterprise platforms like PitchBook.

Choose Tracxn for quality sector analytics and non-US coverage. Crunchbase stays cheaper and broader on US data, and its free trial SaaS model is just simpler to buy.

Harmonic and Crunchbase both target the technology ecosystem, but their platforms are very different. Crunchbase data usually starts when a company announces a round (or a transaction). Harmonic picks up companies before that - its core proposition is to capture companies before they transact, so think: stealth incorporations, early hiring, social media activity, etc.

Harmonic is also much more proficient across people data: it runs from the C-suite down to senior engineers, and the product maps warm introduction paths through its own network.

Harmonic is built API-first and for the AI era. It syncs natively with Affinity, Salesforce, HubSpot and several other tools. Pricing is far higher than Crunchbase pricing. It is quoted per team and reported at $10,000-$30,000 per year.

Choose Harmonic if you need sourcing ahead of announcements. For simply tracking announced rounds and investors, Crunchbase remains the simpler (and significantly cheaper) tool.

Gain.pro and Crunchbase are not very similar products. Crunchbase includes data predominantly on VC funding rounds, its coverage is broad and often self-reported. Gain.pro has deeper and researched coverage. Its analysts spend a claimed 12+ hours per profile, and profiles carry verified financials, ownership structure and business model. It's much more "curated" platform.

Gain's coverage centres on Europe. The deal database holds 500,000+ transactions and 20,000+ investors, filterable by size, date, valuation and investors. Gain has no public comps data.

Pricing is not openly published, but Gain's licenses are annual. Customers are very enterprise: the company claims 100% of MBB/Big-Four advisories and 80% of the top-20 M&A houses as clients.

Choose Gain if you need European private company research with verified financials. For simple funding activity tracking, Crunchbase is cheaper and covers far more companies globally, but with (much) less depth per company.