Catchlight vs Wealthfeed: Prospect Intelligence Compared

Catchlight and Wealthfeed are the two leading prospect intelligence platforms for financial advisors in 2026. Both surface wealth signals and life-event triggers, but they approach the problem differently and fit different practice models.

Here's the operator comparison.

The short answer

Catchlight if you have a defined prospect list (from referrals, networking, target market) and want to enrich and prioritize that list.

Wealthfeed if you want trigger-based lead discovery — finding new prospects who just had a significant life event.

Many growth-focused firms use both. The two solve different parts of the prospect intelligence problem.

What Catchlight does

Catchlight is list-enrichment-first:

• Upload prospects, get wealth estimates and signal data back
• Pre-meeting briefs for prospects you're already working with
• Ongoing monitoring of existing prospects for life-event changes
• Best for: working a defined prospect list more thoroughly

What Wealthfeed does

Wealthfeed is trigger-discovery-first:

• Define your target profile (geography, demographics, signal types)
• Get a feed of new prospects who match your profile and had a recent qualifying event
• Filter by trigger type: business sale, executive transition, inheritance, real estate transaction
• Best for: finding prospects you didn't know existed yet

Wealth estimation depth

Catchlight has stronger overall wealth estimation across general prospects. The platform aggregates many public-data signals into a wealth tier estimate.

Wealthfeed is event-triggered, so wealth estimation is implicit in the trigger (a business sale at $5M+ is a qualifying event with built-in wealth signal).

For raw wealth estimation accuracy on cold prospects, Catchlight tends to be better. For wealth signals tied to specific events, Wealthfeed is purpose-built.

Trigger detection depth

Catchlight monitors existing prospects for changes (good for staying current on people you're already tracking).

Wealthfeed discovers new triggers across a broader population (good for filling pipeline with people you didn't know to track).

For the "I want new prospects this quarter" question, Wealthfeed wins. For the "I want to stay current on my prospect list" question, Catchlight wins.

Integration

Catchlight:

• Salesforce, Wealthbox, Redtail (native or via API)
• Pre-meeting brief workflow integration
• CRM enrichment workflow

Wealthfeed:

• Salesforce, HubSpot (native)
• Other CRMs via Zapier
• Feed delivery via dashboard, email, or webhook

Both integrate cleanly with major advisor CRMs.

Pricing reality (2026)

Catchlight:

• Solo plan: ~$200/seat/month
• Team plan: ~$300-400/seat/month
• Enterprise: $500+/seat/month

Wealthfeed:

• Approximately $300-800/month per geographic market
• Volume-based pricing on triggers delivered
• Custom enterprise pricing for multi-market firms

Wealthfeed pricing varies more by market and trigger volume than by seat. Different model from Catchlight.

The combined stack

Firms running both:

• Wealthfeed surfaces new prospect candidates from triggers
• Triage filters the relevant prospects into the firm's pipeline
• Catchlight enriches each promising prospect with deeper wealth estimation and meeting prep
• CRM tracks engagement and conversion

Total cost for combined stack: $1000-2500/month for a small-to-mid-size firm. Pays back at typical pipeline economics within months.

What we deploy

For solo and small RIA practices (under 5 advisors):

• Catchlight if prospect-list-enrichment is the bottleneck
• Wealthfeed if pipeline-filling is the bottleneck
• Both if the budget supports

For mid-size firms (5-30 advisors) with active growth strategy:

• Both, with combined workflow
• Custom pipeline orchestration (we build) to route Wealthfeed triggers through qualification and into Catchlight enrichment

For larger firms (30+):

• Both, plus internal data layer for proprietary signal detection
• Custom AI workflows on top

Compliance considerations

Both platforms use public-data sources. The compliance frame is the same as any prospect-research workflow:

• Don't share AI-inferred wealth estimates with the prospect directly
• Don't reference how you got specific information at the prospect
• Document retention policy for prospect data
• Treat any outreach as supervised communication

Neither platform raises unusual compliance issues beyond standard prospect-research operations.

What can go wrong

Wrong 1: Buying both at solo scale. Solo advisors can usually justify one or the other. Both is overkill.

Wrong 2: Acting on triggers without qualifying. Just because someone sold a business doesn't mean they're a good fit. Triage matters.

Wrong 3: Using wealth estimates as facts. They're directional, not diagnostic. Use to inform questions, not to define the prospect.

Wrong 4: Skipping the human-edit step on outreach. AI-drafted outreach personalized with trigger data still needs human voice and judgment.

Bottom line

Catchlight and Wealthfeed solve different parts of the prospect intelligence problem. Catchlight makes your existing prospect list more workable. Wealthfeed fills your prospect list with people who just had a qualifying event.

For most growth-focused advisors, both have value. For solo and small firms, the budget often dictates one or the other based on where the bottleneck is (list quality vs list quantity). For mid-size and larger firms, running both with proper workflow integration is increasingly the standard.

Neither replaces the advisor's relationship skill, meeting capability, or judgment. Both compound those by making sure the advisor talks to the right people, prepared.