The PitchBook alternatives a crypto BD team actually has to choose between are Preqin, a general sales database such as Apollo, and a crypto-native deal database such as NAUT. Tested on 28 October 2026 against 1 job, reaching a named human at a crypto fund, NAUT held 564 contacts across the 50 crypto funds with the most tracked capital deployed, 203 of them in a partner, principal, managing director, investment director, CEO or founder role, while Preqin's own pages list 8 asset classes with no crypto among them and Apollo's own pricing page lists its use cases by sales role with no crypto or Web3 use case among them.
How this test was run, and who ran it. NAUT published this comparison and NAUT is 1 of the 4 tools in it, so here is the method in full. The 4 criteria were fixed before anything was scored: does the tool's own public page name crypto as an asset class or use case, does it show a price or a plan without contacting sales, does it get you to a named decision maker at a crypto fund, and can you read a fund's page without a login. Every rival fact below comes from that rival's own page, read on 28 October 2026, and is quoted only where the exact wording was found on the page. The NAUT numbers come from NAUT's own database, read on 28 October 2026: the 50 investor rows with the highest stored capital-deployed figure, from 791M USD to 5.0B USD, each row counted once. NAUT holds a16z under 2 separate rows, Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) and a16z crypto, and this test counts them as 2 of the 50 rather than merging them. 1 defect found in that read is left out of every count below: a fund in the top 50 by capital deployed carries neither a website nor an X handle on its NAUT row. Retest date: 1 December 2026.
What is marked not tested. PitchBook's pricing and plan pages returned a block to our fetcher, so PitchBook's price, its plan list and its crypto coverage are marked not tested here, and the only PitchBook fact in this article is the 1 page we could read. CryptoRank was on the shortlist and its pages did not return readable content to our fetcher either, so it is marked not tested and Apollo took its place in the test. Nothing behind a demo, a trial or a paid login was scored on either tool.
How do the PitchBook alternatives compare on crypto deal data?
4 criteria, fixed before scoring, each answered only from a page read on 28 October 2026.
| Tool | Crypto | Price | Decision maker | Open |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PitchBook | not tested | not tested | not tested | not tested |
| Preqin | no | not tested | not scored | not tested |
| Apollo | no | yes | not scored | no |
| NAUT | yes | yes | yes | yes |
Crypto means the tool's own public page names crypto as an asset class or use case, price means a price or a plan is visible without contacting sales, decision maker means it gets you to a named person in a decision-making role at a crypto fund, and open means a fund page reads without a login. Preqin lists 8 asset classes and none of them is crypto. Apollo sorts its use cases by sales role with nothing crypto or Web3 among them, shows 4 plans with 1 of them free, and needs an account before a record opens. Preqin's fund data sits behind a demo request and Apollo carries no crypto use case, so neither was scored on reach. NAUT reads yes on all 4: all 50 rows in this test are crypto funds, 29 of them carry a decision-maker contact, and the 13 pages linked below open without a login.
PitchBook vs Preqin is the shortlist most BD teams start from, and on this test both sides of it carry cells we could not fill: a blank is more useful than a guess, so 6 cells read not tested and 2 more read not scored. Each not-tested cell is a page that would not load for our fetcher, never a judgment about the tool.
What does each tool's own page say it covers?
PitchBook. The 1 PitchBook page that returned readable content describes its Limited Partners dataset as a way to review LP commitments, mandates and strategies. That is the LP and fund-performance job, and it is the job PitchBook is bought for. No other PitchBook claim is made in this article, because no other PitchBook page loaded on 28 October 2026.
Preqin. Preqin's asset class page lists 8 of them: "Private equity, Hedge funds, Venture capital, Real estate, Private credit, Infrastructure, Secondaries, Natural resources". None of the 8 is crypto or digital assets. Its solutions page lists 8 client types, "Fund managers, Investors, Investment consultants, Banks, Placement agents & third-party marketers, Fund & transaction services, Consulting & corporate advisory, Academic institutions", and none of those is crypto or Web3 either. Its homepage names 3 jobs it does, and the middle one, "Identify top fund managers and conduct early due diligence.", is the allocator's job rather than the BD team's. The other 2 are raising capital faster and finding new business development opportunities.
Apollo. Apollo's pricing page lists 4 plans: Free, Basic, Professional and Custom. The free one is described for "Exploring Apollo or very light usage. Good for founders and early-stage teams.", which is the closest thing to a published entry price in this test. 2 limits sit on that page in plain sight. Credits are use-it-or-lose-it: "Unused credits expire at the end of each billing cycle and do not carry over." And when a trial ends, Apollo's pricing FAQ says a user can move to the free Starter plan, which stays free with no time limit. The page sorts its use cases by sales role, "RevOps, Sales Leaders, Sales Reps, Marketers, Builders, Developers", with nothing crypto or Web3 in the list.
NAUT. The test set is NAUT's own top 50 crypto funds by stored capital deployed. 43 of the 50 carry a website, 48 carry an X handle, 41 carry at least 1 contact, 33 carry at least 1 contact with a Telegram handle, and 29 carry at least 1 contact in a decision-making role. Across the 50 that is 564 crypto fund contacts, 203 of them decision makers. The capital-deployed figure that ranks them is a stored field used to pick the test set, and the fund pages themselves show each fund's investment count and its team.
Which PitchBook alternatives get you to a named decision maker?
On this criterion the 50-fund test set is the whole answer: 29 of the 50 funds have a contact in a partner, principal, managing director, investment director, CEO or founder role, and 33 have a contact with a Telegram handle, so a BD team can open a conversation the same day. Here are 13 of the 50, with the contacts NAUT holds for each and how many of those sit in a decision-making role. The chart below carries the investment count each fund's NAUT page shows.
| Fund | Contacts | Decision makers |
|---|---|---|
 Coinbase Ventures |
14 | 3 |
 Sequoia Capital |
55 | 34 |
 Lightspeed |
24 | 16 |
 Hashed |
14 | 6 |
 Andreessen Horowitz |
20 | 4 |
 Polychain Capital |
13 | 6 |
 a16z crypto |
44 | 29 |
 Pantera Capital |
25 | 7 |
 Mirana Ventures |
8 | 5 |
 NGC Ventures |
13 | 3 |
 IOSG Ventures |
22 | 9 |
 Blockchain Capital |
10 | 3 |
 Arrington Capital |
10 | 5 |
12 of these 13 funds carry a Telegram contact. Hashed is the 1 that does not, so it is an email or X approach.
How many deals does each fund show?
Deal count and reachability pull apart. NGC Ventures shows 152 investments and holds 13 contacts, 3 of them decision makers, while Sequoia Capital shows 46 investments and holds 55 contacts, 34 of them decision makers. A long portfolio is a sourcing signal, and the contact count is what decides whether you can reach anyone.
What this means for a BD team
- Pick the tool by the job. An LP and fund-performance question is what PitchBook's Limited Partners dataset is built for. A named person at a crypto fund is a different lookup.
- Apollo's free plan is the cheapest way to test a sales database, and its own page says unused credits expire at the end of each billing cycle, so a slow month is wasted budget.
- Preqin's 8 asset classes do not include crypto, so a crypto fund is at best a venture capital row there.
- Start with the 29 funds that carry a decision-maker contact, not the 50, because the other 21 need a referral path first.
- Start with the 2929 of the 50 funds carry a contact in a partner, principal, managing director, investment director, CEO or founder role.
- Sort by reach, not sizeSequoia Capital holds 55 contacts and 34 decision makers against 46 investments.
- Open on Telegram33 of the 50 funds carry a contact with a Telegram handle, including Mirana Ventures and Arrington Capital.
- Check the thesis firstEach fund page shows its investment count, from 28 at Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) to 185 at Coinbase Ventures.
What this means for a founder raising
- Build the list from funds whose page shows deals in your sector, then check whether a named decision maker is on it. 41 of the 50 funds carry at least 1 contact.
- Treat the 2 a16z rows as 2 different teams on NAUT, Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) with 28 investments and 20 contacts and a16z crypto with 52 investments and 44 contacts, and read both before you pick a route in.
- A free sales-database seat will give you a work email and no crypto deal history, so it is a second step after the fund page, never the first.
- Match the deal countPolychain Capital shows 87 investments, Pantera Capital 66 and IOSG Ventures 65.
- Find the partner203 of the 564 contacts NAUT holds for these 50 funds are in a decision-making role.
- Pick the channel33 of the 50 have a Telegram contact, and Hashed is 1 of the funds that does not.
How to reach the decision makers
Every fund in the table links to its NAUT page, and each page lists that fund's team with the roles NAUT holds. The 29 funds with a decision-maker contact are where a cold approach has a named target: Sequoia Capital with 34, a16z crypto with 29, Lightspeed Venture Partners with 16 and IOSG Ventures with 9 are the deepest of the 13 shown here. For the 9 of 50 funds with no contact at all, the route is a warm introduction from a portfolio founder, which is what the deal graph on each fund page is for.
Can you pull this data through the NAUT API?
Yes. Every fund in this article is in NAUT's developer API as JSON, the same records the pages show. GET https://api.naut.so/v1/investors/andreessen-horowitz returns that fund with its team and every portfolio round NAUT holds (company, round type, amount, date, and whether it led), for 5 credits a call. A key with no credits gets clearly marked sample data, so you can build against it first. Plans start at $49 a month for 3,000 credits (pricing), and the API docs list every endpoint. Verified Telegram, email and LinkedIn for the people on NAUT unlock on any paid plan: start a 7-day trial.
PitchBook alternatives FAQ
What is the best PitchBook alternative for crypto deal making?
For reaching a named person at a crypto fund, NAUT's crypto-native data was the only 1 of the 4 tools tested on 28 October 2026 whose public pages carry crypto funds and their teams: 50 funds, 564 contacts and 203 contacts in a decision-making role. PitchBook's own Limited Partners dataset stays the better fit for LP commitments, mandates and strategies.
Is Preqin a PitchBook alternative for crypto funds?
Preqin's asset class page, read on 28 October 2026, lists 8 asset classes (private equity, hedge funds, venture capital, real estate, private credit, infrastructure, secondaries and natural resources) and none of them is crypto, so a crypto fund appears there as a venture capital or hedge fund row at best.
Does Apollo cover crypto funds?
Apollo's pricing page, read on 28 October 2026, lists 4 plans (Free, Basic, Professional and Custom) and sorts its use cases by sales role, with no crypto or Web3 use case among them. Its own page also says unused credits expire at the end of each billing cycle and do not carry over.
How much does PitchBook cost?
PitchBook's pricing and plan pages did not return readable content to our fetcher on 28 October 2026, so PitchBook's price is marked not tested in this comparison and no figure for it appears here. The same applies to CryptoRank, which is why Apollo took its place in the test.
Which crypto funds can a BD team reach today?
Of the 50 crypto funds with the most tracked capital deployed on NAUT on 28 October 2026, 41 carry at least 1 contact, 33 carry a contact with a Telegram handle and 29 carry a contact in a partner, principal, managing director, investment director, CEO or founder role. Coinbase Ventures, Polychain Capital and NGC Ventures are 3 of them.
Can I get this data through an API?
Yes. NAUT's developer API at api.naut.so/v1 returns the data behind this article as JSON: GET /v1/investors/andreessen-horowitz returns that fund with its team and every portfolio round NAUT holds (company, round type, amount, date, and whether it led). A call costs 5 credits, and a key with no credits returns marked sample data for free.
Sources
- NAUT database, read on 28 October 2026: the 50 investor rows with the highest stored capital-deployed figure, with their investment counts and contacts.
- Preqin asset classes, read on 28 October 2026: preqin.com/data/asset-classes
- Preqin solutions, read on 28 October 2026: preqin.com/solutions
- Preqin homepage, read on 28 October 2026: preqin.com
- Apollo pricing, read on 28 October 2026: apollo.io/pricing
- PitchBook limited partners, read on 28 October 2026: pitchbook.com/solutions/limited-partners