Head to head
Crunchbase vs LinkedIn
Crunchbase leads the BLP Index (73 vs 59). LinkedIn has more raw reach. Crunchbase is fairer for founders without a network. Crunchbase scores higher on AI visibility.
| Dimension | Crunchbase | |
|---|---|---|
| BLP Index | 73 | 59 |
| Rank | #6 | #53 |
| Type | Directories | Communities |
| Cycle | ongoing | ongoing |
| Listing cost | Free to claim a company page | Free |
| Audience | Journalists, investors, operators, and retrieval systems | Professionals, operators, and B2B buyers in your graph and their graphs |
| Traffic | Brand search and research sessions; not launch-day | Highly dependent on the poster’s network; planning range often 10–30 signups for a solid founder post |
| Backlink | High-authority profile URL | Nofollow |
| Reach | 72 | 74 |
| Intent | 60 | 72 |
| Fairness | 48 | 32 |
| Evergreen | 90 | 48 |
| AI visibility | 88 | 64 |
| Ease | 78 | 50 |
Crunchbase
Claim your organization page. Keep funding, team, and description true. This is entity SEO, not a launch. Pro is a data product, not a ranking you can buy.
Crunchbase is how a lot of the internet answers ‘what is this company.’ An unclaimed or stale page is how assistants invent your headcount. Claiming is free for the basics; Pro is for people who sell with the data.
Full Crunchbase guideA launch post that reads like an operator letter can outperform a board for B2B. The graph is the channel. Cold company pages rarely move.
LinkedIn is where B2B buyers already spend time. A founder-account post with a specific story — who the product is for, a screenshot, a number — can reach hiring managers, operators, and practitioners who will never open Product Hunt.
Full LinkedIn guide