42 Agency
42 Intel · Data-Vendor Scorecard

We tested 12 data vendors on one job change.
Ten got it wrong.

Job-change signals drive a huge share of B2B outbound. So we ran one recent, public move through every job-change data source we have. Two weeks later, most tools still returned the wrong company — including one built specifically to detect job changes.

42 Agency Intel · Tested 2026-07-28 · One clean, public case · Read-only lookups, no outreach

Everyone runs on the same signal. Almost no one checks if it's right.

A job change is the highest-value trigger in outbound. New leader, new budget, warm reason to reach out. Every GTM stack now buys it, and most teams treat whatever their data vendor returns as fact. We wanted a simple answer: when someone changes jobs, how quickly and how accurately do these tools actually know?

So we picked one move we could verify with certainty and graded every source against it.

The case we used

Mikayla Hopkins left Tracksuit to become VP Marketing at Confido around July 14, 2026, and announced it publicly. She had also just posted about how fast the outbound machine reacted to her move:

"One job-change signal, and every GTM stack now thinks I'm the most qualified lead they'll touch all quarter. 32+ SDR calls. 53+ blank 'quick question' emails… The tools are the same for everyone now."

Mikayla Hopkins on LinkedIn. Her move fired 80+ touches in days — so the tools clearly noticed. We tested whether they were also correct.

Our take

The job-change signal is free, and missing from most of what you pay for. The tools that flooded her inbox were reading LinkedIn live. That layer caught the move in days.

The paid databases — the ones you buy because they promise verified, accurate data — got it wrong. Two weeks after a public announcement, ZoomInfo, People Data Labs, Ocean.io, Crustdata, ContactOut, LeadMagic and four more still return the old company. ZoomInfo does it with a 93/100 confidence score attached.

So the signal everyone runs on is a commodity anyone can pull for free, and the "system of record" you pay for is often the slowest, most confident way to be wrong.

10/12
tools still returned the wrong company
2
vendors were right — both live lookups
14
days the move was public before we tested
93
ZoomInfo's confidence score on the wrong answer

Every source, graded against one known answer

Ground truth: VP Marketing at Confido (confidotech.com), started around July 14, 2026, announced publicly. Every source was queried on July 28. "Correct" means it returned Confido.

SourceWhat it returned on Jul 28Freshness it showedVerdict
Correct — both read LinkedIn live at query time
Wiza
Live lookup
Vice President Marketing, Confido
Correct title and employer.
Resolved at query time ✔ Correct
Findymail
Live lookup
Vice President Marketing, Confido
Correct title and employer.
Resolved at query time ✔ Correct
Wrong — cached databases still serving the previous role
ZoomInfo Head of Marketing, Tracksuit
No record of the new company at all.
Confidence 93/100 · marked "valid" Jul 1 ✘ Stale
People Data Labs Head of Marketing, Tracksuit
Re-checked the old role three weeks before the move, and still missed it.
job_last_verified: 2026-06-25 ✘ Stale
Crustdata Head of Marketing, Tracksuit
Saw the job end. Never added the new one.
Logged the old role ending 2026-06-01 ✘ Stale
Ocean.io Head of Marketing, Tracksuit
Its own role-change check returned zero changes.
Profile "updated" 2026-06-30 ✘ Stale
ContactOut Old role + an old board seat
Returned a board seat as the current company.
Both marked current ✘ Stale
Datagma Head of Marketing, company: blank
Sure about the person, blank and wrong on the company.
confidence_score: 1 ✘ Stale
LeadMagic Tracksuit, "Present"
No way to tell how old the answer is.
No freshness field ✘ Stale
DiscoLike Head of Marketing, Tracksuit
Still the previous role.
No freshness field ✘ Stale
Prospeo Board Member; old role still "current"
Picked a board seat as the current role.
last_job_change_detected_at: null ✘ Stale
Icypeas Head of Marketing, Tracksuit
Knows she left. Has no record of where she went.
Logged the old role ending 2026-06-01 ✘ Stale

Scored set = 12 tools that returned a current-employer answer (Wiza and Findymail, plus the 10 that were wrong). A few other tools were queried but didn't return a gradeable current-employer answer, so they're excluded from the 12.

"Verified" and "job-change detector" both got it wrong

Built for this, still wrong

A job-change detector that missed the job change

Datagma's dedicated job-change tool returned Tracksuit as the current employer, with endTime: "Present" and duration: "3 years 5 months." The one tool built to catch this event reported the old role as ongoing.

"Verified" is not "correct"

It re-verified the wrong answer

People Data Labs stamped job_last_verified: 2026-06-25 on the old role — a check dated three weeks before the move. A freshness date tells you when a source last looked, not whether it's right.

Two failure modes, and one misleading number

The misses weren't random. They fell into two patterns, and the "confidence" scores pointed the wrong way in both.

Failure 1

Old data with a fresh-looking date

ZoomInfo ("valid Jul 1"), Ocean ("updated Jun 30") and PDL ("verified Jun 25") all carry recent-looking dates on a two-year-old role. Crustdata and Icypeas even recorded that the old job ended, then never added a new one. They know something changed. They just don't know to what.

Failure 2

The wrong current role

ContactOut and Prospeo returned an old board seat as the current company, because two roles were both flagged current. Datagma returned the title with the company left blank. Even the tools closest to the answer picked the wrong row.

The misleading number: confidence scores measured whether the tool found the right person, not whether the job was current. Datagma returned confidence_score: 1 and ZoomInfo 93/100 while both were wrong about where she works. Nine of the tools showed no freshness field at all.

Signal is instant. The database of record lags.

The three sources that were right share one trait, and the ten that were wrong share the opposite one. That split is the whole story.

Right within days

Reads LinkedIn live

  • LinkedIn itself (Sales Navigator alerts)
  • Wiza — live lookup, returned Confido
  • Findymail — live lookup, returned Confido
Wrong for weeks

Serves a cached record

  • ZoomInfo, People Data Labs, and similar databases
  • Ocean.io, Crustdata, ContactOut, LeadMagic
  • Datagma, DiscoLike, Prospeo, Icypeas
  • Sold on "verified accuracy." Still wrong.

If your stack pulls job-change signals from a database of record, you're working from a snapshot that can be weeks old, with a confidence score that won't warn you. The move isn't hard to detect — it was on a public profile and it triggered eighty touches. The gap is that the layer most teams pay for and trust is the slow one. For freshness, a live lookup beats a cached database.

How we ran it

  • One clean case: a VP Marketing who publicly moved companies around July 14, 2026 (previously Head of Marketing at the prior company). Ground truth confirmed from the person's own announcement and live LinkedIn profile.
  • Queried July 28, 2026, about 14 days after the public move. One lookup per source, by LinkedIn URL. Read-only — nothing was pushed, no outreach sent.
  • Every result was re-checked against each vendor's raw response before publishing. The new company appeared in exactly two paid-provider responses: Wiza and Findymail.
  • The scored set counts only tools that returned a clear current-employer answer. A few others were queried but didn't return a gradeable result, so we left them out rather than guess.
  • One case is one case. This isn't a coverage rate — it's a worked example of a pattern any GTM team can reproduce on their own recent job-changers.

We benchmark the tools instead of reselling them.

If you want to know which data actually moves your pipeline — and which "verified" record is quietly weeks out of date — that's the kind of work we do.

Talk to 42 Agency →
42/ NewsletterWeekly B2B GTM insights. Data, tactics, and POV from the team that runs the plays.