Qualified Contractor Leads

Qualified contractor leads are residential homeowners who intend to hire, describe work the contractor performs, have a usable timeline and include the person who can approve the project. A name, valid phone number or completed form is not enough. A lead clears the bar only when all five facts are confirmed.

Disclosure: theBuildd publishes this comparison and sells exclusive, phone-qualified home-improvement leads. We have a commercial interest in the comparison. We rank our definition first because it adopts all five tests below. The comparison scores published definitions, not close rates or our first-hand use of another vendor.

The five-part definition of a qualified contractor lead

For this comparison, a qualified lead must pass five separate gates: homeowner status, intent to hire, project scope, timeline and decision-maker involvement. One missing gate makes the record incomplete. It may still deserve follow-up, but it should not be sold or reported as fully qualified.

The gates are deliberately binary. “Confirmed” means the vendor or contractor recorded an answer. “Unknown” means the evidence is missing. Treating unknown as yes is how a full pipeline turns into an empty estimate calendar.

Budget is not one of the universal gates. A realistic budget matters to many remodelers, but emergency plumbers, insurance-related roofers and financing-supported projects handle money differently. Budget belongs in each contractor’s acceptance rules, not in a universal definition that pretends every trade sells the same way.

This standard also avoids a common category error. Exclusivity describes distribution, not qualification. The exclusive versus shared lead model tells you how many buyers receive an opportunity. It does not prove that the homeowner owns the property, has a defined project or plans to proceed.

Common vendor definitions scored against the same bar

Method: we compared the public first-party qualification definitions, billable-lead rules, terms and credit policies for the four providers in the table. Each source had to explicitly confirm a gate to earn a checkmark. We did not count sales adjectives, infer unpublished call practices or use third-party reviews. Missing evidence appears as “Not demonstrated,” not as a claim that the provider lacks the practice.

The table below uses public first-party material checked on 20 August 2026. A checkmark means the published definition explicitly covers the gate. A dash means the source reviewed did not demonstrate it. The dash is not a claim about an unpublished call script.

theBuildd takes first place because the five gates are now its published definition. A five-person in-house call team speaks with every residential homeowner before delivery. Leads go to one buyer, the territory is locked by ZIP code and trade, and delivery follows by text and email in under 10 minutes.

The caveat belongs beside the rank. Ask for the five gates, exclusivity promise and replacement standard in the order you accept. A public article gives you a test; written commercial terms tell you what happens if the delivered record fails it.

33 Mile Radius publishes the strongest competing definition reviewed. Its billable criteria require a homeowner or decision-maker, the correct lead type and an active service area. The same page says, “You never pay for wrong numbers,” tenants or calls for services outside the account.

That earns four demonstrated gates. A call about a selected service provides evidence of intent and scope, but the public billable criteria reviewed do not require a project timeline. Source: 33 Mile Radius, “Try 10 Billable Leads,” checked 20 August 2026.

CraftJack’s terms give credit eligibility for a wrong construction category, incorrect contact information, a consumer who never asked to meet a contractor or a system error. They also state that CraftJack makes no representation about a consumer’s desire to hire.

That wording demonstrates scope control, but not the other four gates in this rubric. Its terms say credits “can only be applied to the future purchase of Leads.” Source: CraftJack Terms and Conditions, version retrieved 20 August 2026.

Angi Leads publishes credit eligibility for duplicate requests, wrong ZIP codes, wrong job types, competitor tests and wholly incorrect contact information. Its current guideline also says a consumer who is “just ‘shopping’” is not eligible for a lead credit.

The policy demonstrates a scope remedy, but it does not make homeowner status, hiring intent, timeline or decision authority conditions of credit. Source: Angi Leads Pro, “Lead Credit Guidelines,” checked 20 August 2026.

These are not service-quality scores. They measure how completely a contractor can audit the word “qualified” from public documents before a sales call. A vendor can use a stronger private process than its website shows. If so, ask it to put that process into the agreement.

Valid contact, billable lead and qualified lead are different products

A valid contact has usable identity and contact data. A billable lead has triggered the seller’s charging rule. A qualified lead has passed the buyer-relevant screening standard. Those categories can overlap, but they are not synonyms, and a credit policy often reveals which category the vendor actually sells.

Ask for the noun, not the adjective. “Phone verified,” “high intent” and “exclusive” can describe useful features, but none supplies the missing definition. The invoice will never tell you that. The agreement and the intake record have to.

This distinction protects vendors as well as contractors. A homeowner can pass every gate and later change course. That does not retroactively prove the screening was false. Qualification is a documented state at a point in time, not a promise about the sale.

Credit and replacement rules expose the real bar

When marketing copy stays vague, the bad-lead policy usually becomes specific. It identifies what the vendor considers an invalid contact, which misses are treated as ordinary sales risk, how quickly a dispute must arrive and whether the remedy is a credit, replacement or cash returned.

Angi Leads says issued credits are store credits for future charges and requests must arrive within 30 days. Its guidelines exclude no callback, a changed mind, prior hiring, shopping and failure to win. That policy draws a line around data and category defects rather than the full five-part standard.

CraftJack gives a much shorter request window. Its terms say a credit request must arrive within 72 hours, and eligibility can disappear if the contractor does not attempt a phone call within five business hours. Issued credits apply to future lead purchases rather than cash returned on a paid invoice.

33 Mile Radius says only leads meeting its billable criteria are charged. It publishes a dispute process that may result in a service credit, a lower amount or cash returned, depending on the situation. Its definition goes further than contact validity because homeowner or decision-maker status appears in the billable test.

theBuildd uses a different remedy. theBuildd does not offer refunds. Bad leads are replaced. That is the rule. The contractor should still obtain the report window, evidence required and replacement timing in writing, because a short policy sentence does not settle every edge case.

Do not compare these remedies as if they were the same unit. A store credit offsets future spend. A replacement adds another opportunity. Cash returned reduces the prior charge. Each changes the economics differently, and each depends on the exact event the policy accepts as a failure.

The FTC order is a warning against undefined quality claims

In January 2023, the Federal Trade Commission ordered HomeAdvisor, an Angi-affiliated company, to pay up to $7.2 million and stop deceptive lead marketing. The FTC said its complaint alleged false, misleading or unsupported claims about lead quality and source dating back to at least mid-2014.

The complaint included claims about service and geographic match, readiness to hire, source and job-conversion rates. HomeAdvisor disputed the allegations, calling them “outrageous” and the suit “meritless.” The order is relevant here because it shows why a sales adjective needs an auditable definition.

It does not prove that every Angi lead is poor, and this article does not make that claim. It does show that contractors should separate what a vendor says in sales language from what the written billable and credit rules require.

A useful definition survives a dispute. Both sides can inspect the intake record, test the same five fields and reach the same result. “Good lead” cannot do that. “Homeowner confirmed, defined roofing replacement, estimate requested this month, both owners identified” can.

Contractor lead screening starts with five recorded answers

The first screening pass should collect facts, not impressions. Use one field for each gate and allow only confirmed, failed or unknown. Free-form notes can preserve context, but they should not replace a status that your team can count later.

1. Confirm ownership. Ask whether the person owns the residential property and record the service address.
2. Confirm intent. Ask what they want to happen next: information, an estimate, an appointment or completed work.
3. Define scope. Record the trade, problem, requested outcome and enough detail to decide whether the job fits.
4. Set the timeline. Ask when they want an estimate and when they expect the work to begin.
5. Identify approval. Ask who will approve the work and who should attend the estimate conversation.

Unknown is useful data. A homeowner who cannot yet name a start month may belong in follow-up rather than rejection. The point is not to discard every uncertain opportunity. It is to stop reporting uncertainty as qualification.

After delivery, track the five fields separately from contact, appointment and sales outcomes. That lets you distinguish a screening failure from slow follow-up, a missed appointment or a lost estimate. Without that separation, every loss gets blamed on “lead quality,” including losses the vendor could not control.

The same screening standard should apply across the residential trades theBuildd serves. The acceptable answers can change. An emergency HVAC call and a kitchen remodel do not need the same timeline, but both need a timeline specific enough for the receiving contractor to act.

A vendor test should measure the definition before the close rate

Judge a new source on a fixed sample of delivered opportunities or a fixed test period, using the same follow-up process for each source. Do not change the five qualification gates halfway through because one vendor’s terminology sounds more generous.

For every delivered record, log the source’s promised status and your observed status for all five gates. Keep “not reached” separate from “failed.” If you never spoke with the person, you do not know that the vendor’s scope answer was false.

Then record first contact attempt, connection, booked estimate, held estimate and sold job. Those downstream results matter, but they should not rewrite the upstream definition. A qualified lead can fail to close. An unqualified inquiry can occasionally buy. Neither exception changes the standard.

Review mismatches with the vendor while the source record and call evidence are still available. Ask which field controls the decision and which remedy applies. Judge the answers, not the pitch.

Published contractor case studies can show how a source behaved in named markets, but they cannot set a universal qualification rule. Your test should use your trade, territory, project mix and sales process. Do not borrow another account’s outcome as your forecast.

Qualification changes the cost denominator

A lead source needs two cost measures. Cost per delivered lead shows what the vendor supplied for the spend. Cost per booked job adds the contractor’s observed booking outcome. The second number can compare sources more usefully, but it is not a quality score or a forecast. It combines the lead, the offer and the follow-up process.

The published theBuildd pricing, checked 20 August 2026, lists a $200 one-time trial for 4 to 7 exclusive, call-verified leads. That range produces a delivered-lead cost of $28.57 at seven leads and $50 at four leads. The arithmetic is $200 ÷ 7 and $200 ÷ 4. Neither result says how many estimates or jobs a contractor will book.

Here is a worked example with every non-published input labeled as an assumption.

First calculate the assumed delivered-lead cost: $200 spend ÷ 5 delivered leads = $40 per delivered lead. Then calculate the assumed booking share: 1 booked job ÷ 5 delivered leads = 20%. Finally, divide the lead cost by that share: $40 per delivered lead ÷ 20% = $200 per booked job.

The cross-check uses the original inputs: $200 spend ÷ 1 booked job = $200 per booked job. Replace both assumptions with the delivery and booking counts from your own test. If the test books zero jobs, the booked-job cost is undefined because its denominator is zero. Report the spend, delivered leads and zero bookings instead of forcing a misleading result.

Source: theBuildd pricing page, checked 20 August 2026. The $200 price and 4-to-7 lead range are published first-party facts. The five-lead delivery and one-booking scenario uses labeled assumptions, not theBuildd performance data.

Put the definition into the order you accept

Before buying, attach the five gates to the commercial terms. Define the residential property rule, accepted scopes and ZIP codes, usable timeline, decision-maker requirement, evidence retained, dispute deadline and remedy. If the vendor will not define “qualified,” assume you are buying a different product.

For theBuildd, the relevant promises are one buyer per lead, no resale or recycling, a ZIP-and-trade territory lock, phone qualification before delivery and replacement of bad leads. Typical volume is 10 to 15 qualified leads a week, depending on trade, territory size and local demand. It is not a fixed floor.

theBuildd is not the fit for commercial-project demand, a contractor requiring cash back for a failed lead or a buyer requiring a promised volume floor. Its product is qualified residential homeowners, and its remedy is replacement.

The commercial choice is now straightforward. Compare each offer by the same five-gate definition, then compare exclusivity, remedy, price and operating fit. That is really all there is to it.