Anfloy vs Clay.

When Clay is the right call

• You're a small team and need to enrich lists fast without writing code.
• Enrichment is your only bottleneck - sequencing and routing already work.
• You want a UI a non-engineer on your team can edit directly.
• You're prototyping a GTM motion and don't yet know what to systematize.

When Anfloy is the right call

• Enrichment is solved - what's broken is what happens after.
• You want the system to read your CRM, your Slack, your sales notes, and reason from all of them.
• You need pipeline metrics (booked meetings, accepted demos), not enrichment metrics.
• Your ICP signals aren't in any pre-built data provider, and you need to build them.
• You want the code in your repo so you can extend it without buying more seats.

Do you build inside Clay or replace it?

Usually inside it. Most of our GTM builds use Clay as the enrichment layer because no one else does it as well. We build the layers above and below - signal detection, personalization, sequencing, CRM hygiene, follow-up automation - that turn Clay's enriched rows into actual pipeline.

What if we already have a Clay setup that isn't producing pipeline?

That's the most common reason teams hire us. The fix is almost never 'more Clay' - it's everything around Clay. We audit the funnel, identify where signal-to-meeting drops off, and rebuild that layer as a custom agent. Clay usually stays.

Is Anfloy more expensive than Clay?

Clay is a SaaS subscription priced on credits. Anfloy is a one-time build starting at $5,000 for a single agent, $15K+ for a full GTM stack. The math depends on volume - most clients run both.

Why not just hire someone good at Clay?

Operators good at Clay are good at running Clay. They are rarely good at building the systems that should exist around Clay - webhooks, custom enrichment heuristics, sequencer logic, CRM automation. That's engineering work. Hire a Clay operator for ops; hire us for the system.