Clearcue vs Bombora: Intent Data Comparison (2026)

Clearcue and Bombora represent two generations of B2B intent data. Bombora pioneered account-level intent by tracking content consumption across publisher networks. Clearcue delivers person-level signals by monitoring real-time activity across LinkedIn, X, Reddit, job boards, news, and events. The core difference: Bombora tells you a company is interested, Clearcue tells you exactly who at that company is showing buying behavior.

For startups and growth-stage companies, this distinction matters enormously. Bombora's enterprise pricing ($25,000-100,000+ per year) and account-level data made sense when intent data was novel. Today, Clearcue's person-level signals from €79/month (billed annually) deliver more actionable intelligence at a fraction of the cost. This comparison breaks down when each approach makes sense.

Quick Comparison: Clearcue vs Bombora

Feature	Clearcue	Bombora
Intent level	Person-level	Account-level
Data freshness	Real-time (hours)	Weekly aggregated
Starting price	€79/month (billed annually)	~$25,000/year
Contract requirement	Monthly available	Annual only
Signal sources	LinkedIn, X, Reddit, Jobs, News, Events	B2B publisher network
Signal stacking	Yes, person-level	Topic surge only
MCP for Claude Code	Native (full management)	None
Setup time	Minutes	Weeks to months
Target market	Startups to mid-market	Enterprise

The Core Difference: Person vs Account Intent

The fundamental distinction between Clearcue and Bombora is signal granularity: person-level vs account-level.

Clearcue identifies specific people showing buying behavior. When a VP of Sales complains about their current CRM on LinkedIn, engages with competitor content, and attends a relevant webinar, Clearcue captures these signals and delivers that person's name with full context. You know exactly who to contact and what to say.

Bombora identifies companies researching topics. When employees at Acme Corp consume content about CRM solutions across Bombora's publisher network, Bombora flags Acme Corp as showing intent. You know the company is interested but not which of the 500 employees triggered the signal.

The practical difference in outreach:

Approach	What You Know	Outreach Quality
Clearcue	"Sarah Chen, VP Sales at Acme, complained about Salesforce yesterday and liked two HubSpot posts"	Highly personalized, reference specific signals
Bombora	"Acme Corp is surging on CRM topics"	Generic company-level, guess who to contact

Person-level intent converts better because you can reference specific behavior. Account-level intent requires spray-and-pray across the organization hoping to find the right person. Learn more about how to find buying signals on LinkedIn.

Data Freshness: Real-Time vs Weekly Aggregation

Bombora aggregates intent data on a weekly basis. Content consumption signals from Monday might not appear in your dashboard until the following week. By the time you see the surge, the prospect may have already moved forward in their evaluation or even made a decision.

Bombora's data timeline:

1. Prospect reads content (Monday)
2. Data collected by publisher network
3. Aggregated across Bombora's data cooperative
4. Processed and scored
5. Appears in dashboard (following week)

Total delay: 7-14 days from signal to visibility.

Clearcue's data timeline:

1. Prospect posts on LinkedIn (Monday morning)
2. Signal detected by Clearcue monitoring
3. AI qualifies and contextualizes
4. Alert delivered to your workflow

Total delay: Hours from signal to visibility.

Why freshness matters:

Scenario	Bombora Timing	Clearcue Timing
Competitor complaint posted	See it next week	See it today
Job posting goes live	See it next week	See it today
Event attendance announced	See it next week	See it today
Evaluation started	Catch it late	Catch it early

In competitive markets, reaching a prospect first dramatically improves win rates. Waiting a week puts you behind competitors using real-time signals.

Signal Sources: Publisher Network vs Multi-Platform

Bombora's intent data comes from its B2B Data Cooperative, a network of publisher websites that share content consumption data. When someone reads articles on participating sites, that behavior feeds into Bombora's intent scores.

Bombora's signal sources:

• B2B publisher websites (trade publications, news sites)
• Content consumption patterns across the cooperative
• Topic categorization based on content themes

What Bombora misses:

• LinkedIn engagement and posts
• X (Twitter) conversations
• Reddit discussions
• Job posting signals
• Conference and event attendance
• Podcast mentions
• Direct competitor engagement

Clearcue monitors all these platforms in real-time. The richest buying signals often appear on social platforms where professionals discuss challenges, evaluate solutions, and engage with vendors. Bombora's publisher network cannot capture these conversations.

Signal source comparison:

Source	Clearcue	Bombora
LinkedIn posts/engagement	Yes	No
X (Twitter)	Yes	No
Reddit discussions	Yes	No
Job boards	Yes	No
News mentions	Yes	Partial
Events/conferences	Yes	No
Podcasts	Yes	No
B2B publisher content	No	Yes

For modern B2B buying, social signals often indicate intent before content consumption patterns. Catching a LinkedIn complaint about a competitor is more actionable than knowing a company read articles about your category.

Signal Stacking vs Surge Scoring

Bombora uses surge scoring to indicate when a company's content consumption on a topic exceeds baseline. A score of 80+ suggests elevated interest compared to historical patterns. This tells you the company is more active than usual but provides no granularity on who or why.

Bombora surge scoring:

• Single score per topic per account
• Compares current to historical consumption
• No breakdown of individual signals
• No person-level attribution
• Weekly updates

Clearcue's signal stacking combines multiple person-level signals to identify the warmest prospects. Instead of one number for a company, you see layered signals for specific individuals.

Clearcue signal stacking example:

A lead scores higher when they:

• Engaged with competitor content this week (interested in category)
• Posted about pain with current tool (experiencing problems)
• Work at company hiring for your buyer persona (investing in area)
• Registered for relevant industry event (actively learning)
• Commented in relevant Reddit thread (seeking solutions)

Each signal adds context and confidence. Stacked signals identify people showing multiple buying behaviors simultaneously.

Scoring comparison:

Aspect	Bombora Surge	Clearcue Stacking
Level	Account	Person
Signals combined	Content topics	Multi-platform behaviors
Context provided	Topic name	Full signal details
Actionability	Low (find the person)	High (contact directly)
Update frequency	Weekly	Real-time

Signal stacking at the person level enables highly targeted outreach. Surge scoring at the account level leaves you guessing who to contact.

Pricing: Enterprise vs Accessible

Bombora's pricing reflects its enterprise heritage. Contracts typically start around $25,000 per year and scale to $100,000+ depending on data access, integrations, and account volume. Annual commitments are standard.

Bombora typical pricing:

Component	Typical Cost
Base platform access	$25,000-50,000/year
Additional data modules	$10,000-25,000/year
CRM integrations	Included or extra
API access	Often premium tier
Minimum contract	1 year

Clearcue pricing:

Plan	Monthly	Annual	Signals	Users
Starter	€99/month	€79/month (billed annually)	7	Unlimited
Pro	€249	€199/month	25	Unlimited
Scale	€549	€439/month	75	Unlimited

Annual cost comparison:

Company Stage	Bombora	Clearcue Pro
Startup	$25,000+	€2,388 (~$2,600)
Growth	$50,000+	€2,388 (~$2,600)
Mid-market	$75,000+	€5,268 (~$5,750)

Clearcue costs roughly 90-96% less than Bombora while providing person-level signals instead of account-level data. For startups and SMBs, this makes intent data accessible for the first time.

Pricing model differences:

Factor	Clearcue	Bombora
Entry cost	€79/month (billed annually)	~$2,000/month
Commitment	Monthly available	Annual required
User seats	Unlimited	Often limited
Scaling cost	By signal count	By data volume
Overage risk	None	Potential

Setup and Integration: Self-Serve vs Enterprise Implementation

Bombora requires significant implementation effort. Enterprise deployments typically involve weeks of setup, data mapping, CRM integration work, and training. You need technical resources to extract value.

Bombora implementation timeline:

1. Contract negotiation (2-4 weeks)
2. Technical kickoff and planning (1-2 weeks)
3. Data integration setup (2-4 weeks)
4. CRM/MAP integration (2-4 weeks)
5. Team training (1-2 weeks)
6. Optimization period (ongoing)

Total time to value: 2-4 months.

Clearcue setup:

1. Sign up for trial (2 minutes)
2. Describe signals you want to track (10 minutes)
3. AI configures monitoring (automatic)
4. Receive first qualified leads (same day)

Total time to value: Hours.

Clearcue requires no technical implementation. Natural language setup means anyone can configure signal tracking without understanding data schemas, API mappings, or CRM field configurations.

Integration comparison:

Integration	Clearcue	Bombora
Slack	Native	Via Salesforce/HubSpot
HubSpot	Native	Native
Salesforce	Via webhook	Native
Clay	Native	Via enrichment
HeyReach	Native	No
Custom webhook	Yes	Limited
MCP for Claude	Native	No

MCP Integration: AI Workflow vs Manual Dashboard

Clearcue's native MCP integration enables full signal management through Claude Code. You can create signals, modify rules, query leads, analyze patterns, and generate outreach through natural conversation.

What Clearcue MCP enables:

• Create new signal rules by describing what to track
• Query leads with natural language filters
• Analyze signal patterns across your data
• Generate personalized outreach using signal context
• Automate lead scoring and routing
• Build custom workflows through conversation

Example Clearcue MCP prompt:

"Create a signal tracking CTOs at Series B companies who are complaining about their data infrastructure and hiring data engineers. Show me this week's matches and draft LinkedIn connection requests referencing their specific pain points."

Claude creates the signal, retrieves matches, and generates personalized outreach in one conversation.

Bombora MCP status:

Bombora has no MCP integration. Working with Bombora data through Claude Code requires:

1. Manual export from Bombora dashboard
2. File upload to Claude
3. No real-time data access
4. No signal creation or modification
5. No automated workflows

For teams building AI-powered GTM workflows, this gap is significant. Clearcue integrates into modern AI toolchains while Bombora remains dashboard-bound.

Use Case Comparison

Clearcue is the better choice for most B2B teams. Bombora fits specific enterprise ABM scenarios. Here's when each tool makes sense:

Choose Clearcue when:

• You need person-level signals to contact specific buyers
• Timing matters and weekly delays hurt conversion
• Budget is under $20,000/year for intent data
• You want social signals from LinkedIn, X, Reddit
• Signal stacking for multi-behavior targeting matters
• AI workflow integration through MCP is valuable
• Fast setup without technical resources is required

Choose Bombora when:

• Account-level intent is sufficient for your model
• You run ABM programs at named accounts
• Enterprise budget is available ($25,000+/year)
• Publisher network signals match your buyer's research
• You have technical resources for implementation
• Existing Bombora integrations justify continuation

Use case fit:

Use Case	Better Fit
Startup founder-led sales	Clearcue
SDR team prospecting	Clearcue
Enterprise ABM program	Bombora
Agency lead generation	Clearcue
Mid-market outbound	Clearcue
Fortune 500 demand gen	Bombora

Common Objections Addressed

"Bombora has more data coverage"

Bombora's Data Cooperative is large, but coverage does not equal actionability. Account-level signals across 5,000 topics matter less than person-level signals on the specific behaviors that indicate purchase timing. Clearcue's targeted approach surfaces fewer, higher-quality signals.

"We already have Bombora in our stack"

Many teams use both. Clearcue's person-level signals complement Bombora's account-level data. Use Bombora to identify accounts showing general interest, then use Clearcue to find the specific people to contact within those accounts.

"Bombora integrates with our CRM"

Clearcue integrates with HubSpot natively and other CRMs via webhooks. The integration difference is minimal, but the data difference is fundamental. Account-level intent sitting in Salesforce is still less actionable than person-level signals.

"Our enterprise clients expect Bombora"

If you sell to Fortune 500 and run ABM programs with dedicated ops resources, Bombora fits that motion. For everyone else, Clearcue's accessibility and signal quality provide better ROI.

Combining Both Tools

Some teams use Bombora and Clearcue together for layered intent intelligence:

Combined workflow:

1. Bombora flags accounts surging on relevant topics
2. Filter to accounts matching your ICP criteria
3. Clearcue monitors individuals at those accounts
4. When person-level signals appear, prioritize outreach
5. Reference both account research and individual behavior

This approach uses Bombora's breadth and Clearcue's depth. The combined cost exceeds Clearcue alone but may make sense for teams with existing Bombora contracts wanting better signal granularity.

When combining makes sense:

• Existing Bombora contract with runway remaining
• Enterprise sales motion requiring account-level ABM
• Budget supports both tools ($30,000+/year)
• Need both broad account signals and person-level detail

When Clearcue alone is sufficient:

• No existing Bombora contract
• Person-level signals are primary need
• Budget is constrained
• Social platforms are where your buyers show intent

Migration Considerations

Teams moving from Bombora to Clearcue should consider:

What transfers:

• Understanding of which topics indicate intent
• ICP definitions and account criteria
• Integration patterns and workflows
• Team knowledge of intent-based selling

What changes:

• Granularity (account to person level)
• Data freshness (weekly to real-time)
• Signal sources (publisher to multi-platform)
• Workflow (dashboard to AI-enabled)
• Cost structure (enterprise to accessible)

Migration timeline:

1. Run Clearcue trial alongside Bombora (14 days)
2. Compare signal quality and actionability
3. Build new workflows around person-level data
4. Phase out Bombora at contract end
5. Reallocate budget to other GTM tools

Most teams find Clearcue delivers more actionable signals within the trial period. The switch from account-level to person-level intent typically improves outreach response rates.

The Verdict: Granularity Wins

For most B2B teams, Clearcue is the better choice over Bombora. Bombora built the intent data category by aggregating publisher signals at scale, but that innovation is showing its age. Today, Clearcue's person-level signals represent the next evolution of intent data.

Choose Clearcue if you want to reach specific people showing buying behavior right now. Person-level signals from LinkedIn, X, Reddit, and other platforms capture intent that publisher networks miss. Real-time delivery beats weekly aggregation. Signal stacking identifies the warmest prospects. €79/month (billed annually) beats $25,000/year.

Choose Bombora if you run enterprise ABM programs with dedicated ops resources and budget. Account-level intent across a massive publisher network supports broad demand generation at named accounts. If your motion is enterprise and your budget matches, Bombora remains viable.

For the vast majority of B2B teams, Clearcue delivers better signal quality at accessible pricing. Person-level beats account-level. Real-time beats weekly. €79 beats $25,000. The math is clear. See how Clearcue compares to other intent signal tools.