Sign inGet started
All comparisons
Enterprise technographicsBy anvendor·Updated

anvendor vs HG Insights

Compare enterprise technographics and modelled IT budgets with anvendor’s company-service findings, live checks and spend estimates. Commercial coverage was not benchmarked.

Commercial company stacks not collected

Comparable recall: not measured

No matched company-stack sample was collected from HG Insights. Its public Discovery directory describes products, so it cannot supply a comparable recall score. No percentage is assigned.

Features & integration access

FeatureHG Insightsanvendor
API

Yes · enterprise data

Technographics, installation intensity, IT spend and contracts; plan-dependent.

Official source ↗

Yes · REST API

Company analysis, service checks and customer discovery.

Official source ↗
MCP

Yes · official Phoenix MCP

Technology intelligence through HG’s MCP product.

Official source ↗

Yes · official server

Connect AI clients to the same analysis, discovery and scan operations.

Official source ↗
Usage depth

Installation intensity

Intensity and usage intelligence are different from a share of employees.

Official source ↗

Estimated employee adoption

Where available; use signals do not verify paid seats.

Spend

Modelled IT & AI spend

Cohort-based budgets and contract data; comparable company estimates not collected.

Official source ↗

Estimated annual SaaS ranges

Published plans with estimated usage or size; USD, not invoices.

API/MCP availability describes documented products, not benchmarked results. Access and datasets may depend on the plan. On narrow screens, scroll the table sideways.

Methodology, tested services & customer references

Companies checked: Atlassian (atlassian.com), Canva (canva.com), Shopify (shopify.com), Okta (okta.com), HubSpot (hubspot.com), Databricks (databricks.com), OpenAI (openai.com), Ramp (ramp.com), Stripe (stripe.com) and Airbnb (airbnb.com). We selected well-known technology companies often named in customer references, with roughly fewer than 15,000 staff and matching website and corporate domains. This is a selected sample, not a representative market survey.

The starting point: vendors’ own customer logos and case studies. A company logo, customer story or testimonial published by a service vendor supplied a reference pair: for example, Stripe named by BrowserStack becomes stripe.com × BrowserStack. We then checked whether each collected tool result named that vendor or a matching product.

The reference set contains 316 relationships from 207 vendors: 175 involving vendors in anvendor's catalogue, reviewed individually, plus 141 involving additional vendors. For the additional group, a named product belonging to the vendor counted. Three SendGrid references duplicated Twilio relationships and were excluded.

What the percentages mean. On competitor pages, found ÷ published reference pairs is positive-reference recall. There are no verified negatives, so this does not measure precision. References may be old, describe one team or favour prominent companies. The catalogue subset favours anvendor's coverage; the added vendors came from collected tool lists, so vendors no method reported are omitted. We build anvendor and did not independently verify paid contracts. Missing evidence does not establish non-use.

A separate category analysis: the visibility infographic starts with 714 anvendor findings across 266 distinct services at those ten companies, rather than the 316 published reference pairs. Each finding is classified by service category and checked for traces in website/DNS/infrastructure results, job signals, both or neither. Its percentages are shares of anvendor findings, not retrieval accuracy. BuiltWith covers Stripe only, Sumble its Tech Stack tabs; the collected surfaces do not represent every competitor's full product.

Pricing: 20 selected GitHub estimates use published plans and estimated usage or company size. Vendr's saved GitHub benchmark covers 984 purchases from a different population. The interval overlap provides context; no named company's invoice was checked. Results were saved at different times, rather than collected simultaneously.

Download all 316 reference pairs and source links (CSV)

All 207 tested reference vendors

Each name links to a vendor-published reference page. The CSV maps every company-service pair to its source; this list describes the reference set, not anvendor's entire catalogue or all technologies returned by competitors.

HG Insights combines enterprise technographics with market and spend intelligence. anvendor focuses on finding companies using competing SaaS and business services, with live checks and estimated adoption and annual spend for named accounts. Both cover internal software.

What each tool sees

HG's data documentation describes technology installations, usage signals, firmographics, contracts and modelled spend. That breadth supports market sizing, territory planning and account enrichment. anvendor's narrower workflow starts with a competitor or a company and returns supported service-use findings, with estimates to help prioritize accounts.

 HG Insightsanvendor
What it observesTechnology installations, usage signals and other business dataCompany-service evidence found through live scans
SaaS behind a loginYes — enterprise software technographicsCoverage includes CRM, HR, design, documents, ticketing, code hosting and storage
Depth inside a companyInstallation and usage intelligence; spend modelled separatelyEstimated adoption to help assess the scope of use
Spend figureModelled IT spend by technology categoryEstimated annual spend ranges from sourced plans and estimated usage; estimated rates labeled
Runs tool → companiesYes — installed-base lists at market scaleYes — find companies with evidence of using a competitor
Best atMarket sizing, segmentation, territory planning and account enrichmentSaaS prospecting beyond website visibility, with live checks on demand

What our research can establish

The research used for our ten-company study did not include HG's commercial company stacks. Its public Discovery directory shows product-level information, which is not an equivalent company lookup. We therefore report no HG hit count against the 316 published relationships. Lack of a public result is not a missed detection by the full product.

A concrete spend example

For GitHub at stripe.com, the saved anvendor result estimated 36% adoption and annual spend of $50.4k–$101k. We have no comparable HG product-level result for that pair. A modelled IT budget for a company or category would answer a different question, so it should not be placed beside this range as if both described one GitHub contract.

Which to use

  • HG Insights: broad enterprise enrichment, market and territory planning.
  • anvendor: self-service competitor prospecting and live checks of supported services.

Evaluate both on companies and vendors you know. The public research does not establish which has better commercial coverage.

Competitor use can signal a need in the category and help your team qualify a lead. It does not establish budget, dissatisfaction or intent to switch. Check the account against your ideal customer profile and identify a reason to reconsider before outreach. Spend ranges are estimates, not invoices or guaranteed deal sizes.

anvendor may reuse recent findings. Results less than 30 days old are treated as fresh; an already purchased result can be reopened without another charge. Choose Refresh to request a new paid live scan. Empty or failed checks return their credits.

Frequently asked questions

Is a modelled spend figure wrong?

A modeled budget can help size a market. anvendor combines a company-service finding with estimated usage and sourced vendor plans; estimated rates are labeled where a public rate is unavailable. Neither figure is an invoice, and actual contracts can differ.

Does anvendor cover as many companies as HG Insights?

HG offers broader market data. anvendor reports company-service matches for which it finds evidence, across several hundred services. Compare both providers against the vendors and companies that matter to your team; a catalogue listing alone does not establish coverage for every company.

Can I use both?

Yes. You can use market and competitive analysis to choose a segment, then research named accounts and their service use before outreach. Whether you need both depends on the coverage and workflow your team needs.

Suggest a correction · Sources and estimate limitations

Related

Find companies using your competitors’ SaaS

Uncover usage hidden from website scanners and request live checks on demand. Prioritize prospects with estimated adoption and annual spend. Discovering companies is free on every plan; you pay only for a detected match.

Get started free