How to Verify a LinkedIn Automation Tool's Real Price Before You Trust a Comparison Page

Why comparison pages disagree on the same tool

I'm Hlib Storchak. I build outbound systems for B2B founders and sales teams, and I've booked 2000+ meetings for B2B clients doing it, which means I spend a lot of time helping people pick tools, not just run them. When I went looking for a clean Dripify vs Waalaxy vs HeyReach vs Expandi pricing comparison for a client recently, I found something worth writing up on its own: two independent sources quoted Dripify's top tier at $99 a month, and two others quoted the exact same tier at $79 a month. Neither was fabricating a number. One was quoting monthly billing, the other was quoting the discounted annual rate, and neither said so.

That pattern isn't unique to Dripify. It's structural. LinkedIn automation vendors all run a monthly-vs-annual discount and most now run multi-tier plans with different included credits, and a huge share of the "best LinkedIn automation tools compared" content ranking for these queries is written by affiliates or SEO teams working from screenshots and old notes, not a live check of the vendor's page on the day of publishing. This isn't a knock on any single post. It's a reason to treat every comparison page, mine included, as a starting point you verify, not a number you copy into a budget.

Step 1: go to the vendor's own current pricing page

This sounds obvious and gets skipped constantly, because a search for "[tool] pricing" surfaces comparison and review sites above the vendor's own page more often than it should. Open the vendor's own domain, not a reseller, an affiliate roundup, or an "alternatives" page, and confirm you're looking at dripify.com, waalaxy.com, expandi.io, or heyreach.io directly rather than a cached or translated mirror. If the page 301-redirects to a different domain (Dripify's does, from dripify.io to dripify.com as of this writing), follow the redirect and check you landed on the real one.

Step 2: check whether the number is monthly or annual billing

This is the single biggest source of the "two sources disagree" problem I ran into. Fetched directly from dripify.com/pricing, Dripify's actual structure is three tiers with two billing cycles each:

A comparison post that says "Dripify's top tier is $99" and one that says "$79" are both technically right, and both are useless to you unless they tell you which billing cycle they mean. Expandi has the same shape on a single plan: $99/mo billed monthly, $79/mo on annual billing, per expandi.io/pricing fetched directly. Waalaxy's own pricing page states its three tiers, Pro at €19/mo, Advanced at €49/mo, and Business at €69/mo, and separately shows a monthly/quarterly/yearly toggle with quarterly at -20% and yearly at -50%, without displaying the resulting discounted figures in the same view, which is its own version of the same trap: the headline number and the number you'll actually pay on a longer term are not the same, and you have to click through to see by how much.

Step 3: check the billing unit, seat, sender, or flat fee

Dripify and Waalaxy price per user seat. Expandi prices per LinkedIn account connected, which functions like a seat for a single operator but scales differently for a team. HeyReach is the outlier: its entry Growth tier, $79/mo per sender fetched directly from heyreach.io/pricing, bills per LinkedIn sender account, not per human user, and its Agency tier flips to a flat fee, $999/mo for 25 senders, expandable to 50, with an Unlimited tier at $2,999/mo for unlimited senders. That structural difference means the same headline number is not comparing the same thing.

Run the arithmetic on a concrete case: an agency running LinkedIn outreach across 10 client accounts, coordinated by 2 human operators, would pay roughly 2 seats on Dripify or Waalaxy (if those tools support multiple connected accounts per seat, which varies by plan) but 10 sender fees on HeyReach's entry tier, unless the volume justifies jumping straight to HeyReach's flat-fee Agency plan. Neither structure is wrong. They're just not the same unit, and a comparison table that lists both as "$/mo" without noting what that dollar buys is comparing apples to a fruit basket.

Step 4: check what's actually included at that tier

The plan name and price are the easy part to verify. What's bundled at each tier moves just as much and gets flattened in most comparison posts. Waalaxy's own page shows email-finder credits jumping from 25 a month on Pro to 500 a month on Advanced and Business, a 20x difference for a €30 step up, and LinkedIn invitation caps moving from 300 to 800. HeyReach's enrichment credits scale from 100 per sender on Growth to 1,000 on Agency to 3,000 on Unlimited. If a comparison page quotes "Waalaxy Advanced" against "HeyReach Growth" on price alone, it's silently comparing a 500-credit plan against a 100-credit one, which changes what a fair per-dollar read actually looks like.

This is the same mistake I flagged when comparing Expandi and HeyReach head to head: the pricing shape, not the sticker number on the day you read it, is the thing worth planning around, because tier boundaries and what's bundled at each one shift more often than the underlying structure does.

Step 5: check the free trial and free plan terms directly

Waalaxy runs a genuine permanent free plan, 80 LinkedIn invitations a month with no credit card required, confirmed directly on its own pricing page, alongside a separate 14-day free trial of its paid tiers. Dripify and Expandi both run a 7-day free trial of the paid product with no permanent free tier. HeyReach doesn't advertise a free plan on its pricing page at all, but does run a named early-stage program for companies under $250,000 ARR, worth asking about directly if you're a young company rather than assuming it isn't available because it's not on the public page. "Free" means three different things across these four tools, and a roundup post that just puts a green checkmark in a "free plan" column for all of them is glossing over which kind of free you're actually getting.

Step 6: check a feature-gating claim against the source, not the comparison

Waalaxy locks cold email sequences behind its Business tier specifically, confirmed on its own pricing page, so a comparison post that lists "email support: yes" for Waalaxy without noting the tier is technically correct and practically misleading if you're pricing out the Pro plan. Expandi runs the opposite structure: a single Business plan with every feature included and no stripped-down entry tier, so there's no tier-gating question to ask at all, which is itself a fact worth confirming rather than assuming, since most of its competitors do gate by tier. The general rule: any claim of the form "[Tool] supports [feature]" needs a tier attached before it's actually useful, and the tier is exactly the detail that gets lost when one comparison page summarizes another.

Step 7: date-stamp what you found, and note where it might already be stale

Pricing pages for this category change often enough that a number verified today can be wrong in three months. When I take over a client's tool stack, the first thing I do is write down the date I checked a price next to the number itself, not just the number, so six months later it's obvious whether the figure needs a refresh before it goes into a new budget conversation. Every price in this article was fetched directly from the vendor's own page in August 2026. Check current pricing before you commit to anything based on this table or any other.

The four tools, side by side, verified directly

Source: dripify.com/pricing, waalaxy.com/pricing, expandi.io/pricing, and heyreach.io/pricing, all fetched directly in August 2026. Figures are the plans' own stated numbers, not restated from a comparison or review site.

Who this actually costs money: agencies quoting client budgets

The mistake I see most often here isn't an individual buyer overpaying by a few dollars, it's an agency or a fractional operator pricing a client proposal off a stale or mislabeled comparison number, then having to explain the gap once the client's card gets charged the real amount. If you're quoting a client's tool budget as part of a retainer or a build, that's the one number in the proposal you cannot afford to get from a secondary source. Pull it from the vendor's own page the same week you send the quote, and note the date you checked it in your own working notes, not just in the client-facing document.

Which I reach for, and when

For a single operator or a two-to-three-seat team wanting deep personalization and native email fallback, I reach for Expandi; the single-plan, no-gating structure makes budgeting simple even if the entry price is the highest of the four. For a small team on a tight budget that wants to test the waters with a free tier before spending anything, Waalaxy is the obvious starting point. For an agency coordinating outreach across a dozen or more client-owned LinkedIn accounts, HeyReach's flat-fee tiers stop punishing you for scale in a way per-seat pricing eventually does. Dripify sits in the middle: simpler to set up than Expandi's branching logic, cheaper at the entry tier, and a reasonable default when a client doesn't have a strong reason to need any of the other three's specific strengths. None of these four is the objectively better tool; which one is cheaper for a given team depends entirely on seat count, sender count, and which features that team will actually use, which is exactly why the verification steps above matter more than any single ranked list.

FAQ