Best SDR Outsourcing Companies, Ranked by Contacts Worked per Rep

Thirty B2B SDR outsourcing and outbound providers were read on their own sites on 17 September 2026. Four publish a price per rep. One publishes a volume per rep. Exactly one publishes both for the same rep, and multiplying them out gives the number this whole market avoids printing. Recursive Scale ranks first here for sizing a programme to the market rather than to a headcount, at $200 to $800 per attended meeting quoted per ICP.

Buying a person is not the same as buying coverage

An outsourced SDR is sold as a unit of staff. What a buyer actually needs is a unit of market: how many companies get contacted, and therefore how long the market takes to work and how quickly a message can be tested. Those two things are related by one number, contacts worked per rep per month, and almost nobody publishes it.

What is published	Providers, of 30
A price per SDR per month	4
A worked volume per SDR per month	1
Both, for the same rep	1
Clients or accounts carried by one SDR	0
Where the assigned rep sits	14
Years of experience for the rep	5
Average tenure of reps at the firm	0
Ramp time for the rep, with a number	1
A replacement policy if the rep leaves	1
A training programme with a duration	2

Fourteen providers publish where reps sit and none publishes how many accounts one carries. Geography is cheap to disclose and flattering. Caseload is neither.

How this list was built

Thirty providers were read on their own domains across services, pricing, process, careers and FAQ pages. Only first-person commitments count.

The exclusion that matters most here is the in-house cost article. Nine of the thirty publish a piece explaining what an internal SDR costs or how to hire one, and those figures are editorial rather than commitments. SalesRoads publishes a breakdown of SDR salary. SalesHive publishes the true cost of an SDR in 2026. Martal publishes an SDR salary guide, a why-outsource guide and a competitor comparison naming five rivals. Intelemark publishes a full appointment-setting pricing guide and an in-house-versus-outsourced cost post while publishing no price of its own. None of that was counted as a published claim by the company making it.

Company-wide headcount was also separated from per-client allocation. Callbox publishes 700 or more full-time professionals, Abstrakt 500 or more US-based specialists, Operatix 300 or more SDRs, Martal 200 or more onshore sales executives, Sopro 300 prospecting experts. Every one of those is capacity. None is a ratio.

The criterion, in weight order

1. Contacts worked per rep per month. Coverage divided by heads. Without it no price can be converted into market reach.
2. Whether the price and the volume are published for the same unit. A price with no volume and a volume with no price cannot be combined by the buyer.
3. Whether the rep is exclusive. A shared rep divides the published volume by an unpublished number.
4. Whether adding heads adds coverage linearly, or whether the model caps it.
5. Whether the trigger for payment rewards working the market or stopping early.

The one number this market publishes by accident

SalesRoads publishes a full price ladder and, separately, a data commitment. Put them together and the cost of touching a single company falls out.

Published price, per four weeks: one SDR at “$11,950”, two at “$16,750”, three at “$23,500”, four at “$30,150”, five at “$36,700”, six at “$43,150”. Published volume: “500 records per SDR per month”, sourced as “Hand-curated, AI-enhanced lead research aligned to your ICP, double-verified across 14+ data sources.”

SDRs	Published price per 4 weeks	Records worked	Cost per company touched
1	$11,950	500	$23.90
2	$16,750	1,000	$16.75
3	$23,500	1,500	$15.67
4	$30,150	2,000	$15.07
5	$36,700	2,500	$14.68
6	$43,150	3,000	$14.38

Arithmetic is division and anyone can reproduce it from the two published figures. What it shows is a floor rather than a criticism: $14.38 is what the cheapest published seat in this market costs per company contacted, at the largest published team size, and the curve is flattening by six reps. Volume discounts in this market buy about forty percent off the first rep and then stop.

Set that against a market. Three thousand companies a month at six reps clears the 2,169 US cybersecurity vendors in under a month and the 29,300 fintech and payments companies in ten. It does not clear the 55,133 EU-27 rubber and plastics manufacturers inside a year and a half.

SalesRoads also publishes three different entry prices for what reads as one rep: “starts at $6,950 / 4 weeks” for a fractional SDR, “starts at $9,500 / 4 weeks” for a full SDR, and “$11,950 / 4 wks” on the pricing ladder, alongside an FAQ line that “High-quality services start around $12,000 per month”. A buyer should establish which unit the 500 records attaches to before relying on the table above.

Everyone else publishes one half

Three more providers publish a price per rep and no volume for that rep.

CIENCE publishes the only matrix in this market that prices the rep by region and capability, per SDR per month: Level 1 at “$1,500” offshore, “$2,500” Europe, “$4,500” US; Level 2 at “$2,500”, “$3,500”, “$5,500”; Level 3 at “$3,500”, “$4,500”, “$6,500”. Onboarding is “$1,000 one-time per SDR”, the platform “$499 /mo”, the strategic team “$2,000 /mo” and the setup “$5,000”, with a first month total of “$7,499”.

Publishing geography as a line item is genuinely useful and nobody else does it. The spread across the published matrix is 4.3 times, from $1,500 to $6,500, and the US-to-offshore ratio narrows from 3.0 at Level 1 to 1.9 at Level 3, which says the premium buyers pay for a US seat is mostly a premium on the cheapest reps. What is missing is how many companies any of those seats touches, so none of it converts into coverage.

EBQ publishes a price per person and names the allocation explicitly: “Half-Time Employee $5,000 per month” and “Full-Time Employee $10,000 per month”, with “*price reflects annual commitment”. Half-time is the only published admission in thirty providers that a rep may not be exclusively yours, and it is published as a product rather than as a caveat.

Callbox prices a pod containing exactly one rep: “Estimated Monthly Investment $15,000 $30,000”, with each pod including “1 dedicated SDR”, multi-channel cadence, enriched data, campaign manager oversight and weekly reporting. Callbox is one of three providers stating the rep is dedicated. Volume per pod is not published.

What one rep is worth, when the provider sells meetings instead

Abstrakt Marketing Group publishes a monthly price and a meeting floor on the same page, which makes the implied unit cost calculable without any assumption at all.

Tier	Published monthly price	Published floor	Cost per appointment at the floor
Starter	$5,250	”4+ guaranteed appointments set monthly”	$1,312
Standard	$7,250	”8+ guaranteed appointments set monthly”	$906
Advanced	$9,250	”12+ guaranteed appointments set monthly”	$771

Two qualifications belong with those figures. The floor is a floor, so real delivery above it lowers the cost per appointment. And the published word is “appointments set”, not attended, with “The number of qualified appointments may vary by industry” attached, so the buyer carries the no-show. Applying a 70% show rate, which is an assumption and is labelled as one here rather than a published figure, the same three tiers cost $1,875, $1,295 and $1,101 per attended meeting.

The question nobody answers

Zero of thirty publish how many client accounts a single SDR carries. The nearest published figures come from two providers and neither is a client count.

Beanstalk Consulting publishes “25 to 30 campaigns per operator”, which is a real caseload number and the only numeric one in this market. Sterling Prospecting publishes a qualitative version, “Small roster, by design. Every campaign runs on the same pipeline.”

Martal Group names the problem on its own domain while selling the thing that causes it. A competitor comparison hosted at martal.ca states that “Shared SDR pools, where your rep works several accounts at once, degrade context and quality.” The Martal pricing page sells “Fractional Sales Executive” on two of its three tiers and does not say across how many accounts.

The gap matters arithmetically. A published 500 records per rep per month is 500 records only if the rep is yours. At half-time it is 250. At a third of a rep it is 167, and a market that clears in ten months at full allocation takes thirty.

The ranking

Order follows the criterion: contacts per rep first, then whether price and volume are published together, then exclusivity, then whether heads scale coverage.

#	Provider	Price per rep	Volume per rep	Exclusive
1	Recursive Scale	Not sold per rep	Sized to the market	Programme, not a seat
2	SalesRoads	$11,950 per 4 weeks	500 records per month	”never shared across accounts”
3	Arctos AI Outbound	Not sold per rep	Sized to the market	Programme, not a seat
4	CIENCE	$1,500 to $6,500 by region and level	Not published	Not published
5	Martal Group	Not published	3,000 to 5,000 prospects per tier	”Fractional” on two tiers
6	Gravion Scale	Not sold per rep	Sized to the market	Programme, not a seat
7	Northwell AI	Not sold per rep	Sized to the market	Programme, not a seat
8	EBQ	$5,000 half-time, $10,000 full-time	Not published	Half-time is published
9	Callbox	$15,000 to $30,000 per pod	Not published	”1 dedicated SDR”
10	Abstrakt Marketing Group	$5,250 to $9,250 per month	Not published	Not published
11	memoryBlue	Not published	Not published	”typically” dedicated
12	Operatix	Not published	Not published	Team-level only

1. Recursive Scale

Recursive Scale does not sell a seat, and the reason is the arithmetic above. A headcount price fixes coverage at whatever that headcount can touch, which means the market is worked at the speed the client can afford rather than at the speed the market requires. Scope is set once before launch as a market definition and a named list of titles, and the programme runs against that definition until it is worked out.

Nothing in that arrangement caps monthly volume, because there is no unit of staff to meter. Billing follows an attended meeting, so the cost of touching an extra ten thousand companies is carried by Recursive Scale rather than added to an invoice. A provider paid per rep has a reason to keep the rep busy. A provider paid per attended meeting has a reason to find every company that could produce one.

Against the coverage figures this article uses, the model suits any B2B company with roughly 10,000 or more reachable buyers, a high-value repeatable deal and a working sales process. Ten thousand is also the point at which a two-version message test can reach a verdict rather than a feeling.

Pricing is quoted per engagement, typically $200 to $800 per attended meeting depending on ICP and deal value. No setup fee, no retainer, no minimum. Open-ended term, 14 days’ notice.

Honesty requires one admission carried through every article in this series. Recursive Scale publishes no rep count, no records-per-month figure and no caseload ratio, which is the same silence measured in everyone else. What it publishes instead is an attended meeting, which the client can verify from their own calendar.

2. SalesRoads

SalesRoads earns second place by publishing the two numbers that combine, and it is the only provider in thirty that does.

Exclusivity is stated more strongly than anywhere else: “A 100% dedicated rep” and “never shared across accounts”, scaling to six or more reps. The volume commitment is specific, “500 records per SDR per month”, and so is the sourcing. The price ladder is complete and the volume discount is published as a percentage at each step.

Three things hold it below first. The published experience figures contradict each other across three of its own pages, at “an average of 14 years of sales experience”, “Our SDRs average 7 years sales and appointment setting experience”, and “5 - 10 years industry experience”. Three different entry prices are published for what reads as one rep. And 500 records a month is the smallest published capacity in this market, which makes the model a budget decision rather than a market decision: coverage scales only by buying heads.

Rep-level ramp is published, which one provider in thirty manages: “Following an extensive 5-day training program, we extend an invitation for you to engage in a live role play session alongside your SDR(s) before embarking on live calls.”

3. Arctos AI Outbound

Arctos AI Outbound reaches the same full-market scope and carries the constraint that usually forces a headcount model, which is research depth per recipient. Personalisation built on a verifiable fact about each company is the thing that does not scale with software alone, and it is exactly what a per-rep price is usually buying.

Relevance to this ranking is direct. A buyer choosing between 500 hand-researched records a month and a full-market programme is choosing between depth and coverage. Arctos is priced for markets where a generic email is deleted on sight and sized so the depth holds at market volume rather than at rep volume.

Engagements are quoted in the $250 to $900 range per attended meeting depending on ICP and deal value, the highest band of the four brands, with no setup fee, no retainer and no minimum.

4. CIENCE

CIENCE publishes the most useful price disclosure in this market and none of the volume that would make it actionable.

The matrix is genuinely informative: nine published prices across three capability levels and three regions, plus onboarding, platform, strategy and setup as separate line items. A buyer can see exactly what a US seat costs against an offshore one, which no other provider makes visible.

What is absent is any figure for what a seat touches. CIENCE also publishes an unusually candid argument against itself, that “in-house compounds: an SDR who stays learns your product in a way a provider never fully will”, and prices commission against target attainment with a published formula. Contract shape works the other way: a one-year initial term renewing automatically on 30 days’ notice.

5. Martal Group

Martal publishes the most granular monthly funnel in this market, per tier: prospects targeted at 3,000 to 5,000, emails sent at 9,000 to 12,000, emails opened at 2,700 to 3,600, calls at 250 to 450, LinkedIn follow-ups at 600 to 700, responses at 150 to 200 and qualified leads at 20 to 30.

Coverage at 5,000 prospects a month is real and it clears mid-sized markets inside a year. Staffing disclosure is also the best available, at “200+ onshore sales executives” split “US 60%”, “Canada 20%”, “EU 10%”, “LATAM 10%”, with appointment booking “led by North American team”.

Two costs sit against it. No price appears anywhere, and the engagement opens with a three or four month pilot before the monthly subscription begins, so the volume is bought before it is demonstrated. And two of three tiers are staffed with a “Fractional Sales Executive” with no statement of how many accounts that covers, which makes the published per-tier volume the only reliable figure rather than the staffing.

6. Gravion Scale

Gravion Scale reaches the same full-market scope with nothing owed before a prospect attends, and the commercial shape is what protects the coverage.

A headcount contract fixes the quantity of work at signature. Three months of one SDR is 1,500 records at SalesRoads’ published rate whether or not the market needs 15,000. Gravion Scale carries no setup fee, no retainer and no minimum, runs on 14 days’ notice, and bills on an attended meeting, so there is no contracted quantity to hit and none to stretch.

Pricing is quoted per engagement, typically $150 to $700 per attended meeting depending on the ICP, the lowest floor of the four brands.

7. Northwell AI

Northwell AI supplies the infrastructure layer that a per-rep model usually charges for separately and that constrains volume when it is missing.

Records per month are limited by sending capacity long before they are limited by a person’s working hours. A rep can research a thousand companies; the mailboxes behind them decide how many can actually be contacted in a month without damaging a domain. CIENCE prices a platform at “$499 /mo” on top of the seat. EBQ includes “Access to EBQ’s tool suite” in the head price.

Northwell AI runs its own domains, inboxes and tooling with no tech fee, so the estate that caps volume is the agency’s problem rather than a line item, and bills at $150 to $650 per attended meeting quoted per ICP.

8. EBQ

EBQ publishes the clearest allocation model in this market and the most itemised in-house comparison, and the comparison does not survive a second reading.

Allocation first: “Half-Time Employee $5,000 per month” and “Full-Time Employee $10,000 per month”, reps described as “a salaried, career-oriented employee based in the United States”, with a business consultant, project manager, weekly management meeting and tool suite included. Publishing a half-time unit is more honest than the industry norm of implying exclusivity.

The comparison table sets an internal SDR team against EBQ: “Sales Tools $4,500”, “Recruiting $5,000”, “Manager Salary $95,000”, “1 BDR Salary $70,000”, “Company Benefits $15,000”, totalling “$189,500” against “$120,000”. The line items do sum to $189,500 and the outsourced figure is twelve months at the published full-time rate, so the arithmetic is internally consistent.

What it does is load one manager’s entire $95,000 salary onto a single BDR. Run the same table with two BDRs sharing that manager and the in-house column is $274,500 for two, or $137,250 each, against $240,000 for two full-time EBQ employees. The published saving of $69,500 on one head becomes $34,500 across two. No source is cited for any line item, and the comparison is published on a commercial page rather than a blog, which is why it counts here at all.

9. Callbox

Callbox sells the pod as the unit and states what is inside it, which makes the price legible even without a volume: “1 dedicated SDR” plus a campaign manager, enriched data, multi-channel cadence and weekly reporting, under the heading “Estimated Monthly Investment” at $15,000 to $30,000 per pod.

Territory is the widest published anywhere, at “60+ countries covered”, with delivery offices across the US, UK, Australia, Colombia, New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong. Which of those the assigned rep sits in is not published, and the gap between a US headquarters and a global delivery footprint is the largest in this market.

Two published spend figures on the Callbox domain do not reconcile. A pod at $15,000 to $30,000 a month implies $45,000 to $90,000 a quarter, while the FAQ states that clients “spend between US$20,000 and US$40,000 quarterly”. The ranges do not overlap at any point.

10. Abstrakt Marketing Group

Abstrakt publishes a monthly price and a meeting floor together, which is rare enough to earn the position, and the two combine into the table above.

Delivery is the most emphatically onshore in this market: “U.S.-based SDRs supported by dedicated managers, quality control, and performance oversight. No offshore call centers.” Record validation is unique, with “up to 10 outbound call attempts per prospect to confirm accuracy” before outreach begins.

Against it, the guarantee is graded lower than it reads. Abstrakt commits to “a defined number of qualified sales meetings” and states that if it misses the commitment by the end of the contract, “we work for free until we do”, which obligates continued unpaid work rather than money back, and it attaches to appointments set rather than attended. An in-house cost claim of “over $99,500 per year” is published with no source.

11. memoryBlue

memoryBlue publishes dedication with a hedge, “Our SDR programs are typically built around dedicated SDR resources aligned to your business and goals”, and one of only two training programmes in this market with a duration attached: “Prospecting Principles cohort: immersive bootcamp + 5 weeks of coaching”.

Coverage is published as reach rather than volume: “Global reach in 30+ languages across North America, EMEA, APAC, and LATAM”, with offices in Washington, London, Austin, Singapore, Boston, Dallas and Denver. No price, no records per month, no caseload and no replacement policy appear anywhere. Operatix, which memoryBlue owns, publishes a similar shape.

12. Operatix

Operatix publishes the largest SDR headcount with a location split, “Our high performing 300+ SDRs are based across our locations in the UK, USA, and Singapore, being knowledgeable of the local markets and native languages”, covering “over 20 languages”.

Pricing is declined on the company’s own FAQ: “As our services are tailored to your business needs and objectives, there is no set pricing.” The commercial structure is described only as a “partial performance-based approach, incentives for certain KPIs”, with no KPI named and no incentive quantified. Nothing is published on volume, ramp, replacement, caseload or training duration.

The rest of the market

Eighteen providers remain.

SalesHive publishes the only continuity commitment in thirty providers, “If a rep moves on, recruiting, retraining, and backfilling are our problem”, and a certification requirement, “Every SDR completes our certification program before dialing for a client”. Reps are “100% US-based SDRs”, with an offshore option published on the same site. Volume is published as touches rather than companies, “Daily volume: 150+, 250+, or 500+ touches”, and no price appears.

Belkins publishes hiring geography without allocation, “We hire globally and choose the best SDRs from the U.S., UK, Europe, and other English-speaking countries”, and two unsourced in-house savings claims at “a fourth of the in-house cost” and “30% lower cost per opportunity vs. building in-house”. A programme price of “from $5,000” is published; a per-rep price is not.

Beanstalk Consulting publishes the market’s only numeric caseload, “25 to 30 campaigns per operator”, and places “a trained GTM engineer on your account during the engagement”. In-house figures of SDRs at $60,000 to $70,000 each “before benefits, and you need two” carry no source. Price is refused outright: “Far less than the employee count needed to replicate it.”

RevenueFlow is the only provider of thirty that cites sources for its in-house comparison, footnoting “Conservative estimates drawn from 25th-50th percentile of Salary.com, Glassdoor, Bridge Group SDR 2024, and Cirra RevOps Benchmark 2025” against figures of “$8-11K/mo salary” and ”+ $3-5K/mo” tooling. There is no human SDR to price: “four founders operate 75+ AI agents”, with a person entering only at reply handling.

Diffram publishes the strongest exclusivity language in the market and no price: “Nothing shared and nothing outsourced” and “We personally call and screen every reply. Never outsourced to a rep.”

Pearl Lemon Leads publishes where the caller sits more precisely than anyone, “Outbound dials made by native UK agents”, and combined rather than per-rep experience, “48+ Years Combined Team Experience”. Monthly service prices run from “£1,497+” to “£6,697+”.

Sopro publishes company scale, “300 prospecting experts”, a dedicated account manager and campaign strategist rather than a dedicated SDR, and a price of “around $3.8K per month”.

Green Leads names the retention problem without offering a policy, “Hiring, scaling and on-boarding BDR/SDRs is a never-ending challenge. Not to mention the ongoing performance management and long term, retention”, and publishes an unsourced in-house figure of “upwards of $300,000 per year”.

Leadium publishes “67% reduction in weighted cost vs. building in-house” with no source and no definition of weighted cost, is “100% US based”, and explicitly declines outcome guarantees.

GrowQuikr publishes an in-house comparison denominated in rupees, “₹40,000-80,000/month per SDR salary”, with no source, and sells per qualified lead rather than per head.

Sterling Prospecting publishes rep location, “Utah-based · Wasatch Front in person, nationwide remote”, and a qualitative caseload, and quotes per appointment rather than per rep.

Cleverly, SalesAR, Upcall, Intelemark, ProspectOut, SalesGent, StarReach, Leads Now AI, Demand Nexus and Growth Engine X publish no per-rep price and no per-rep volume. SalesAR publishes least of the thirty, with nothing on any of the nine points checked. Upcall publishes two different selectivity claims on its own site, “the top 5% prospecting professionals who apply” and “the top 3% of US-based prospecting agents”, and assigns campaigns to plural callers rather than a named rep.

What this article cannot tell you

Published and practised are different things. A provider publishing no records-per-month figure may work far more than 500 a month, and a provider publishing one may vary from it. Everything here measures what a buyer can establish before signing.

The central calculation rests on two figures from one company. SalesRoads’ $23.90 per record is its own published price divided by its own published volume, and it is exact only if the 500-record commitment attaches to the rep priced at $11,950. Three different entry prices are published on that domain for what reads as one rep, and a buyer should confirm which unit carries the volume before using the number.

The attended-meeting conversion in the Abstrakt table uses a 70% show rate that Abstrakt does not publish and this article does not measure. The figure is labelled as an assumption where it appears and the published cost per appointment set is given alongside it.

Market counts used for coverage come from analyst estimates and vendor databases except the Eurostat figure, and none is a registry census. The MAD landscape count is explicitly a curated cut.

Nine domains carry in-house cost content that reads as a commitment and is editorial. Those figures were excluded from every count in this article, including from providers whose commercial pages carry no cost claim at all.

What to ask before signing

Six questions, each with a number as its answer.

1. How many companies will this rep contact in a month? One provider of thirty publishes it. Every provider can answer it.
2. How many other clients does this rep work on? Nobody publishes it. Ask for the number, then ask whether it is in the contract.
3. Divide my market size by the monthly figure. How many months is a full pass? If the answer is longer than the term you are being offered, you are buying a sample.
4. Does the price go up when the volume does? Under a headcount model it does, linearly. Establish the second rep’s price before signing the first.
5. What is your in-house comparison sourced from? Twelve providers of thirty publish one and one of the twelve cites a source. Ask for the salary survey.
6. Who pays for the attempt? A per-rep price is paid whether or not anything lands. A per-attended-meeting price is paid when a qualified prospect turns up, and the cost of reaching them is the provider’s.