Free interactive tool
Enrichment Waterfall Calculator: Is Each Source Worth It?
In an enrichment waterfall each record goes to one source at a time and stops at the first match, so the second source only ever sees what the first could not fill, and the third sees even less. A source’s own advertised match rate says nothing about that leftover. This calculator measures every step on the records it actually received: its hit rate on the leftovers, the coverage it adds, what each correct match costs once wrong matches are taken out, and whether that is more than a correct match is worth to you.
The formula
records reaching step i a_i = N − (new matches from steps before i) hit rate on leftovers h_i = m_i ÷ a_i step cost c_i = fixed fee + price × (a_i if billed per lookup, m_i if billed per match) correct matches r_i = m_i × share correct cost per correct match k_i = c_i ÷ r_i coverage added m_i ÷ N keep step i when k_i ≤ V (V = what one correct match is worth to you)
Two things change the answer more than the price. A source billed per lookup pays for every leftover record it is sent, matched or not, so its cost per match rises as the steps before it get better. And a match that is wrong costs the same as one that is right, then costs again when a rep acts on it; that is why the verdict uses correct matches, from your own spot check, not all matches.
Run your numbers
In one period, e.g. last month: accounts or contacts sent to the first source.
The most you would pay for one correct field. Leave blank to see costs without a keep/drop call.
- Coverage (any match)
- 810 of 1,000 · 81.0%
- Coverage (correct matches)
- 756 · 75.6%
- Total cost for the period
- 114.50
- Blended cost per correct match
- 0.15
| Step | Records reaching it | Hit rate on leftovers | Coverage added | Cost | Per correct match | Wrong matches added | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source A | 1,000 | 62.0% | 62.0 pts | 50.00 | 0.08 | 31 | Keep |
| Source B | 380 | 39.5% | 15.0 pts | 30.00 | 0.22 | 15 | Keep |
| Source C | 230 | 17.4% | 4.0 pts | 34.50 | 1.08 | 8 | Costs more than it earns |
Costs are in whatever currency you entered. “At least” coverage without a dropped step assumes the later steps match no more than they do now, although they would receive more records.
Worked example (hypothetical numbers)
A RevOps team fills company size for the 1,000 identified accounts a month that arrive without it (hypothetical numbers, the tool’s default input). A correct size is worth about $1.00 to them: it replaces two minutes of a rep’s manual lookup. Source A, billed at $0.05 per lookup, fills 620; Source B, billed at $0.20 per match, fills 150 of the 380 left; Source C, billed at $0.15 per lookup, fills 40 of the 230 left. A spot check of 40 records per source found 38, 36 and 32 correct: 95%, 90% and 80%.
Source A costs $50 for 589 correct matches, about $0.08 each. Source B costs $30 for 135, about $0.22 each. Source C costs $34.50 for 32 correct matches, $1.08 each, more than the $1.00 they are worth, and it adds 8 wrong company sizes a month. Its hit rate on its leftovers is 17.4%, and it adds 4 points of coverage (77% to 81%). The team drops Source C: cost falls from $114.50 to $80, and correct coverage goes from 75.6% to 72.4%. The 230 records still unfilled go to the reps’ manual queue, which the value already priced in.
Where do the inputs come from?
- New matches per step. From the waterfall’s own run log, or a CRM report grouped by the field that records which source filled the value (the waterfall guide calls it
enrichment_source_used). Count only records a step filled that no earlier step had. - Price and billing basis. From the order form or the vendor’s price page. Check which it is: some sources charge for every lookup, others only when they return a value. A subscription with an included allowance is a fixed fee for the period.
- Share correct. Pick 50 of one step’s matches at random (all of them if it has fewer) and check each against the company’s own site or a record you trust, as in the match-quality audit. Check each step on its own: accuracy on the leftovers can differ from what the same source shows on easy records.
- What a correct match is worth. Price the work it saves or the decision it enables: the minutes of manual research it replaces times the cost of a rep’s minute, or the routing it makes possible. If you cannot price it, leave the field blank and compare the steps’ cost per correct match with each other.
What should you change when a step fails?
- Drop it when the records it fills can wait for a rep or go without the field. The incomplete-data guide helps decide which gaps block a decision and which do not.
- Move it earlier when it is billed per match and accurate: it still pays only for what it fills, and the per-lookup sources after it are sent fewer records. Moving a per-lookup source earlier does the opposite and makes it pay for more lookups.
- Narrow what it receives when the field only matters for some records, for example only target-segment accounts. Fewer lookups cut a per-lookup cost directly.
- Renegotiate or swap it when its accuracy is the problem. A cheaper source with more wrong matches can cost more per correct match than a dearer one.
When is the calculator too simple?
- Reordering. The calculator scores the order you ran. It does not know how many matches a source would make on records an earlier step used to take, so a new order needs a new test month, or a sample sent to each source on its own.
- Several fields per call. If one lookup returns company size, industry and region, count a match as the field you needed, and value the extra fields only if a decision uses them.
- Sources that disagree. A waterfall that stops at the first match never sees a later source contradict an earlier one. If accuracy is low early, a cross-check sample through two sources is worth more than a longer waterfall.
- Personal data. Each extra source is one more party receiving your records. Before you add one, the data-minimization guide and your vendor review apply, whatever the cost per match.