Two email finders, two starting points

The difference is the starting point

Both tools solve the same final step, but they begin at opposite ends.

Hunter starts from the domain. You give it a company website, Hunter searches the open web for addresses on that domain, derives the pattern, and can then build the likely address for any name. This works regardless of whether the person maintains a profile anywhere.

Skrapp starts from the profile. You work inside a result list on a professional network, the extension reads name and company and derives from there. More convenient, as long as your targets are findable there.

For German industrial mid-market that is a concrete difference. A maintenance manager at a family-owned firm with 180 employees often keeps no professional profile at all. He may well appear in the legal notice page, a press release or a team page. The domain route finds him. The profile route does not.

The source is the real difference

Hunter distinguishes between an address actually found somewhere on the web and one derived from a pattern. For the former it names the page. That sounds like a detail and is not one.

Practically, an evidenced address is far less often wrong than a derived one. Legally, if you have to document where a piece of personal data came from, and under Article 14 GDPR you generally do, a named source page is something entirely different from the sentence that a tool supplied it.

Skrapp does not surface that distinction. Everything comes out looking the same.

Price: Skrapp wins, but the invoice is not the whole story

At comparable volumes Skrapp sits below Hunter, noticeably so in the mid-tier plans. Both publish their pricing, both have a free entry tier with a small allowance, and with both a lookup counts whether or not it succeeds.

The second part matters more than the first: count found and actually deliverable addresses, not lookups. A cheaper tool with half the hit rate is more expensive in the end. Test both against the same list of thirty real targets from your own market before committing. It costs nothing and answers the question better than any comparison article.

What neither can do

Both answer the question: what is this person's email address. That is a narrow, useful question and both answer it well.

They do not answer which companies are worth approaching in the first place. They do not tell you how large a company is, who owns it, or what its last filed accounts looked like. And above all they do not tell you why this company should talk to you right now.

That is not a criticism, it is the scope. An email finder is the last link in a chain. If the earlier links are missing, you end up with a correct address and no reason to write. In Germany that is also where the legal problem sits: marketing email to business recipients presumes consent under section 7 UWG, and that presumption depends on your offer being recognisably relevant to that specific recipient. An address alone does not carry that argument.

If you want to evidence where your addresses came from, take Hunter. If you want to collect cheaply from profile lists, take Skrapp. If what you are missing is the reason, a third address tool will not help.