TL;DR
If you use Dun & Bradstreet for company data (firmographics, financials, group structure, industry codes), InfobelPRO covers the same ground, on volume pricing with a flat file or API rather than an annual platform contract. Not the credit half: PAYDEX and payment-risk analytics have no InfobelPRO equivalent. For beneficial-ownership investigation, Moody's Orbis. For open registry records, OpenCorporates.
Quick verdict: which provider fits which job
| If you need… | Choose |
|---|---|
| Company data without an enterprise contract | InfobelPRO |
| Business credit scores and payment risk | Dun & Bradstreet, Creditsafe |
| Bulk or API delivery priced on volume | InfobelPRO |
| A D-U-N-S Number for federal contracting | Dun & Bradstreet (free, see FAQ) |
| Corporate linkage and group structure | InfobelPRO |
| AML, due diligence, PEP and sanctions data | Dun & Bradstreet, Moody's Orbis, OpenSanctions |
| Industry classification in NACE and SIC | InfobelPRO |
| Beneficial ownership investigation | Moody's Orbis, InfobelPRO |
| Open registry records | OpenCorporates |
What Dun & Bradstreet is good at
- The D-U-N-S Number
- A globally recognised nine-digit business identifier assigned across a database of 600M+ entities, required for US federal contracting and used as the de facto standard by governments and large enterprises.
- Credit and payment risk
- PAYDEX scores, delinquency and failure predictors, maximum credit recommendations.
- Depth in the United States
- 185 years of operation and a reported 30,000+ proprietary sources spanning public records, court filings and financial statements. That history is concentrated where it was built: Dun & Bradstreet holds first-party data in the US, the UK and the Nordics. Europe is the mirror image, because outside those markets their records are partner-licensed, and that is where our own registry depth is strongest.
- Compliance grade
- AML and KYC-grade hierarchy data, compliance-ready enrichment, coverage cited across 200+ countries.
Why teams look for Dun & Bradstreet alternatives
- Every deal is a custom annual contract. Pricing is never published and every deal is negotiated annually, which is standard for enterprise data. The constraint is the bundle: identity, hierarchy, credit, compliance and contacts come as one contract. Need the company layer but not the credit analytics, and you buy both.
- Delivery is platform-first. Access is seat-based, through the platform and the Direct+ API, and designed for analyst workflows. If you want a flat file or a raw feed for your own warehouse, with redistribution rights, that is a different shape of agreement, not a better one.
- Non-US data is partner-sourced. First-party data covers the US, UK and Nordics; everywhere else is licensed through its worldwide partner network. The reach is real, but freshness and traceability vary by market. If your ICP is European, or SMB rather than enterprise, that variance is what to test, and where a dedicated United States business database or a broader multi-market source gets evaluated alongside it.
The alternatives compared
| Provider | Coverage | Delivery | Key constraint |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dun & Bradstreet | Global | Platform, Direct+ API, bulk | Enterprise contract; bundled scope |
| Moody's Orbis | Global | Platform or API | Enterprise pricing |
| InfobelPRO | Global | Bulk flat file, REST API | No credit scores; contact coverage partial |
| Creditsafe | Multi-market | Platform, Connect API | Credit-focused, not prospecting |
| OpenCorporates | 140–170+ jurisdictions | API, bulk SFTP | Call caps; no UBO or contact data; depth follows how much each registry publishes openly |
Vendor details verified August 2026. Check each provider's site for current terms.
InfobelPRO vs Dun & Bradstreet
| Dimension | Dun & Bradstreet | InfobelPRO |
|---|---|---|
| Business identifiers | Yes | Yes |
| Group structure | Yes | Yes |
| Credit scores and payment risk | Yes | No |
| AML, due diligence, PEP and sanctions data | Yes | Company data layer only |
| Industry classification (NACE, SIC) | US-standard codes | Yes |
| Global tax ID verification | No | Yes |
| Monthly to daily refresh, all datasets | Varies by local provider frequency | Yes |
| Bulk flat-file delivery | Platform-first | Yes |
| Delivery without platform onboarding | Platform onboarding | Yes |
| No seat licensing model | No | Yes |
| Redistribution rights and contract flexibility | No | Yes |
Vendor details verified August 2026. Check each provider's site for current terms.
Developers evaluating the integration side can read the delivery detail on the company data API page, and the classification crosswalks on the industry classification codes hub.
Which one fits
Dun & Bradstreet, if you…
- Need business credit scores or payment-risk analytics
- Need to obtain a D-U-N-S Number for your own business
- Need AML, PEP or sanctions screening
- Have analysts who want a platform to work in rather than a data feed
- Are comfortable with an annual enterprise contract and the procurement that comes with it
InfobelPRO, if you…
- Need company data but not credit analytics, and object to paying for both
- Cannot commit to a rigid annual contract and want flexible or multi-year terms
- Need consistent records across markets in one schema, without managing format variance
- Segment by NACE or SIC and need crosswalks between them
- Are building a product on the data and need redistribution rights
- Want a flat file or an API rather than a platform to learn
Frequently asked questions
They solve different problems. For company data (firmographics, financials, group structure, industry codes) InfobelPRO covers the same ground, delivered as a flat file or API on volume pricing rather than an annual platform contract. For credit risk and payment-risk analytics, Dun & Bradstreet has no InfobelPRO equivalent and is the right choice. Neither is better across the board.
Scope and commercial model. Dun & Bradstreet bundles identity, hierarchy, credit, compliance and contacts into one custom annual contract. InfobelPRO sells the company-data layer alone, priced on volume. Most teams evaluating both need part of what Dun & Bradstreet bundles and are deciding whether the rest justifies the contract.
Dun & Bradstreet does not publish enterprise pricing. Every deal is a custom annual contract, quoted on seats, record volume and which modules you take, so the only reliable figure is the one you are quoted. Entry-level self-serve products are listed on their site and change periodically, so check dnb.com for current rates. If you are comparing total cost, price the modules you actually need rather than the bundle.
InfobelPRO, for building on top of company data: bulk flat files and a REST API priced on volume, with redistribution rights available. Dun & Bradstreet offers the Direct+ API and is technically capable, but enterprise licensing generally restricts redistribution inside your own product, and the contract cycle is long.
Yes for the company-data layer. Firmographics, financials, group structure and industry codes map across, and most teams run a match test on a sample of their existing records first to check coverage on their own entities. What does not migrate is credit: if you use Dun & Bradstreet for PAYDEX or payment-risk analytics, keep that part.
Creditsafe for SMB credit at mid-market cost, or Moody's Orbis for financials with ownership depth. InfobelPRO does not provide credit scores and is not an alternative for this use case.
Test on your own entities. Take 500 real accounts from your CRM, define the specific fields that matter, send the same list to every shortlisted vendor and compare match rate and fill rate per field. Ask how each field is sourced, how often it refreshes, and what happens to records that go stale mid-contract. Treat published record counts as marketing rather than measurement. Across this market they are self-reported, counted on different rules, and rarely comparable between vendors.
Test it on your own records
Send us 500 companies from your CRM, including any outside the US. We will return match rates and field fill rates so you can compare on your own data rather than on published claims.
Weighing several vendors at once? Read the InfobelPRO alternatives comparison.
