I ran the same 500 prospect list through cold email and LinkedIn simultaneously for 90 days. Cold email booked more meetings but LinkedIn closed more deals
multichannel_dan_k · 2026-08-11 · 990 views
Ninety days. Same 500 contacts. Cold email on one side, LinkedIn connection messages on the other. Running simultaneously. I wanted a real head-to-head, not a thought leadership post with made-up conclusions.
The ICP: operations directors and VP of Operations at logistics companies with 50 to 200 employees. Notoriously hard to reach by cold email. Very active on LinkedIn.
Cold email setup: 8 PuzzleInbox Google Workspace inboxes through Instantly. Four-email sequence over 12 days. Average email length 68 words. No links in emails one or two.
LinkedIn setup: Connection request with a short note under 300 characters. If accepted, one follow-up message. No more. I do not run LinkedIn like a sequence tool.
Cold email results: 19 percent reply rate. 14 positive replies. 8 meetings booked. 2 closed deals in the 90-day window.
LinkedIn results: 34 percent connection acceptance rate. Of those who connected, 11 replied to the follow-up message. 3 meetings booked. 3 closed deals.
LinkedIn closed more deals on fewer meetings. Here is why I think that happened: people who accepted a connection and replied to a direct message demonstrated more active buying intent. They chose to engage twice. By the time we got on a call, they were warmer. Cold email meetings had more just-curious energy that needed more nurturing before a decision.
My takeaway: cold email books more meetings, which matters when your funnel needs volume. LinkedIn books fewer meetings but the conversion from meeting to deal is meaningfully higher for this ICP.
I now run both simultaneously as a matter of course. When the same contact books through cold email AND accepts my LinkedIn connection, that account gets a priority flag in my CRM. Those close at nearly double the rate of single-channel contacts.