Salmon vs D&B + Traction Complete

Two vendors. Two contracts.
One Salmon.

D&B gives you a DUNS number and a static firmographic record. Traction Complete tries to clean up the mess. Salmon replaces both with real-time research, entity resolution, and verified data in a single platform.

The real problem

D&B was built for a world that updated annually. Yours doesn't.

D&B's database is refreshed on quarterly or annual cycles. By the time the data reaches your CRM, people have changed jobs, companies have restructured, and your reps are calling into the void. Then you buy Traction Complete to fix the duplicates and hierarchy gaps that D&B's static matching creates.

Two tools. Two contracts. Still stale data.

Annual
D&B's typical deep refresh cycle
Real-time
Salmon verifies at point of query
50-80%
lower cost vs. D&B + Traction Complete

Common D&B + Traction Complete frustrations

  • Firmographic data is months or years out of date by the time it reaches your CRM
  • DUNS matching misses subsidiaries, DBAs, and recently acquired entities
  • Need Traction Complete (or similar) just to resolve duplicates and map account hierarchies
  • Contact-level data is thin — D&B is firmographic-first, not people-first
  • Annual contracts with rigid credit packs that don't flex with your actual usage
  • No confidence scoring — you get data back with no indication of how fresh or reliable it is
Side by side
D&B + Traction Complete vs. Salmon
Capability
D&B
Traction Complete
Salmon
Data freshness
Annual / quarterly batch
N/A (uses D&B data)
Live at time of query
Research method
Static proprietary database
N/A
Multi-source AI research
Entity resolution & dedup
DUNS matching only
Account matching & hierarchy
Built-in — included in enrichment
Account hierarchies
DUNS tree (static)
SF-native hierarchy mapping
Live parent-child resolution
Contact-level enrichment
Limited — firmographic focus
Account-level only
40+ fields per contact
Multi-source verification
Single database
Relies on D&B data
Web + partners + your data
Confidence scoring
No scoring
No scoring
Scored with reasoning trace
Continuous CRM refresh
Manual re-exports
One-time matching
Auto-refresh, self-healing CRM
Vendors required
1 of 2
2 of 2
One platform, one contract
Typical cost (500K records)
$250K–$400K/yr
$30K–$80K/yr additional
$150K/yr all-in

One vendor replaces two

Most organizations that use D&B end up buying Traction Complete (or a similar tool) to handle account matching, hierarchy mapping, and deduplication that D&B's static DUNS matching can't solve.

Salmon includes entity resolution, deduplication, and account hierarchy mapping as part of every enrichment pass. You get better data, fresher data, and fewer vendors — at a lower total cost of ownership.

Total cost of ownership

The math on 500K records

D&B + Traction Complete can run $280K–$480K per year for a 500K-record CRM. Salmon delivers more — enrichment, entity resolution, dedup, and continuous refresh — for less.

D&B
$0.40–$0.80
per record
Annual contract. Firmographic enrichment only. Contact data limited. Credit-based.
Traction Complete
$30K–$80K
per year (additional)
Account matching & hierarchy only. Requires D&B data underneath. Salesforce-only.
Salmon
$0.075
per record / quarter
Enrichment + entity resolution + dedup + continuous refresh. One platform. One contract.
"We were paying D&B for firmographics and Traction Complete for matching. Salmon replaced both and the data is actually current."
Senior Director, BI & Data Operations — Enterprise Software Company

See it work on your actual data.

We'll run Salmon against a sample from your CRM — the same records D&B has. You'll see what's stale, what's missing, and what Salmon finds that D&B doesn't.