Two ways to do LinkedIn outreach, and what each one costs you

Almost every tool in this category automates the LinkedIn action. Dizenly does not. That single difference decides which risks you carry and which problems you solve, so it is worth understanding before comparing feature lists.

The two models

Neither is dishonest. They solve different problems and carry different risks, and most comparison articles skip straight past the distinction to a feature grid.

Automation tools

Expandi, HeyReach, Dripify, Waalaxy and most of the category

How it works
Software performs the LinkedIn action for you, usually from the cloud. The good ones manage the risk carefully - warm-up periods, limit ranges, dedicated IPs, spreading volume across several sender accounts.
What you get
Volume. Far more outreach than a person could do by hand.
What it costs
LinkedIn does not permit automated access for this, so the risk is real and it sits on your account rather than the vendor’s.

Selection tools

Dizenly

How it works
Software decides who is worth contacting and drafts what to say. A person performs the LinkedIn action from their own account, working a queue that is already sorted and already written.
What you get
A shorter list worth contacting, with a readable reason attached to every name, and no automation for LinkedIn to detect.
What it costs
Less volume. A person can only do so much in a day, and that is the trade.

Questions about the category

What LinkedIn permits, what the trade actually is, and why we compare ourselves to tools we think carry more risk.

Not sure which model fits?

Tell us how many people run outreach and how big the list is. Half of the answer is arithmetic and we can do it on a call.

Is automation against LinkedIn’s terms?

Automated access and scraping are prohibited by LinkedIn’s User Agreement, and LinkedIn does enforce it - with warnings, temporary restrictions and permanent ones. That is not a claim about any particular vendor, and every team should read the current terms themselves rather than take any vendor’s word for it, including ours.

So are automation tools a bad idea?

They are a trade, and plenty of teams take it knowingly and do well. The mistake is taking it without knowing. If an account restriction would cost you a quarter of pipeline, the trade looks different than if you have twenty sender accounts and can lose one.

What does Dizenly do that a spreadsheet cannot?

Score every row against your ICP on nine weighted factors, sort the list by that score, write the reason down so the ranking can be argued with, and re-score everything automatically when your ICP or a prospect’s own data changes.

Can I use Dizenly alongside an automation tool?

Yes, and some teams do - Dizenly to decide who and what, another tool to execute. We will not pretend that is a strange thing to want, though the account risk of the second tool is unchanged by the first.

Why compare yourself to tools you say are riskier?

Because that is what people are actually choosing between, and a page that pretends the category does not exist is no use to anyone deciding. Each comparison names the cases where the other tool is the better buy.

Start here

The fastest way to compare is to run your own list

Bring one export. You will know inside a day whether a ranked, reasoned queue is better than the order your team works from today - which is the only comparison that settles anything.

Not ready to talk? Start the 14-day trial on your own list instead.

  • No credit card
  • No LinkedIn credentials
  • Your own prospects