LicenseTheData.comA field guide to business-data licensing
Home/Comparisons

Public evidence · 13 October 2026

Centific vs Turing Project Lazarus

Direct licensing meets direct licensing. Neither advertised amounts nor a public seller route establish what your business will receive.

Jump to the terms ledger ↓

Research comparison; limited public terms. Pair-level evidence and scenario review is pending. Published fields alone do not meet our indexing threshold. This page is noindex and absent from the sitemap, not a negative verdict.

The terms ledger.

Headquarters or contact location is not seller eligibility. Response, acceptance and payout stages are not interchangeable.

Published descriptions and unresolved contract terms
CriterionCentificTuring Project Lazarus
Operating recordsPublished
CRM, contracts, projects, email, finance, healthcare operations, HR, ITSM and warehouses
Source ↗
Published
Communications, tickets, wikis, databases and code; code not required and not bought alone
Source ↗
Company eligibilityPublished
Operating, winding-down or closed companies. Intake includes Up to 50; no numerical minimum published.
Source ↗
Published
Any company with real operating history and an authorized representative; operating, winding-down or closed.
Source ↗
Seller geographyUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Published
Most regions; strongest demand US/UK/Canada/EU; export restrictions apply.
Source ↗
Published compensationProvider claim
Written individually scoped estimate; employee annotation optional and priced separately.
Source ↗
Provider claim
Single payout up to $1M; USD context; not recurring royalties or a guaranteed offer.
Source ↗
Fees & net proceedsPublished
No extraction/anonymization/transfer fees, setup costs or deductions.
Source ↗
Unknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Timeline & payment triggerProvider claim
Most partnerships reach first accepted contribution in 6–10 weeks; payment on acceptance. Acceptance estimate is not a payout SLA.
Source ↗
Provider claim
Intake call within one business day; valuation usually within a week of access. Neither is a payout deadline.
Source ↗
Preparation & seller effortPublished
Estimate → scoped connections (188 applications) → extraction → anonymization → sample approval → acceptance; optional quarterly refresh.
Source ↗
Published
NDA → intake → representative sampling/valuation → one contract.
Source ↗
Ownership & permitted usePublished
License or, for some wind-downs, asset-purchase agreement; distinguish ownership sale from licensing.
Source ↗
Published
Retains underlying ownership; defined rights to prepared record.
Source ↗
Privacy & approvalProvider claim
Scoped read-only, encrypted and logged processing; sample approval.
Source ↗
Provider claim
Named team, scoped access, air-gapped processing; personal data/secrets removed before model use. SOC 2 Type II claimed.
Source ↗
ExclusivityUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Unknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Retention & deletionUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Unknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
HQ / published contactPublished
Redmond, WA, US; Suite 100 versus St.120 address discrepancy in official pages needs confirmation.
Source ↗
Unknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.

Operating records

CentificPublished
CRM, contracts, projects, email, finance, healthcare operations, HR, ITSM and warehouses
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusPublished
Communications, tickets, wikis, databases and code; code not required and not bought alone
Source ↗

Company eligibility

CentificPublished
Operating, winding-down or closed companies. Intake includes Up to 50; no numerical minimum published.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusPublished
Any company with real operating history and an authorized representative; operating, winding-down or closed.
Source ↗

Seller geography

CentificUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Turing Project LazarusPublished
Most regions; strongest demand US/UK/Canada/EU; export restrictions apply.
Source ↗

Published compensation

CentificProvider claim
Written individually scoped estimate; employee annotation optional and priced separately.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusProvider claim
Single payout up to $1M; USD context; not recurring royalties or a guaranteed offer.
Source ↗

Fees & net proceeds

CentificPublished
No extraction/anonymization/transfer fees, setup costs or deductions.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.

Timeline & payment trigger

CentificProvider claim
Most partnerships reach first accepted contribution in 6–10 weeks; payment on acceptance. Acceptance estimate is not a payout SLA.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusProvider claim
Intake call within one business day; valuation usually within a week of access. Neither is a payout deadline.
Source ↗

Preparation & seller effort

CentificPublished
Estimate → scoped connections (188 applications) → extraction → anonymization → sample approval → acceptance; optional quarterly refresh.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusPublished
NDA → intake → representative sampling/valuation → one contract.
Source ↗

Ownership & permitted use

CentificPublished
License or, for some wind-downs, asset-purchase agreement; distinguish ownership sale from licensing.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusPublished
Retains underlying ownership; defined rights to prepared record.
Source ↗

Privacy & approval

CentificProvider claim
Scoped read-only, encrypted and logged processing; sample approval.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusProvider claim
Named team, scoped access, air-gapped processing; personal data/secrets removed before model use. SOC 2 Type II claimed.
Source ↗

Exclusivity

CentificUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Turing Project LazarusUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.

Retention & deletion

CentificUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.
Turing Project LazarusUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.

HQ / published contact

CentificPublished
Redmond, WA, US; Suite 100 versus St.120 address discrepancy in official pages needs confirmation.
Source ↗
Turing Project LazarusUnknown
Not published / not established
Not established in inspected sources. Ask for the actual agreement; unknown does not mean free, unrestricted or accepted.

Which difference matters to your company?

Data fit

For your existing records, start with category fit: Centific lists CRM, contracts, projects, email, finance, healthcare operations, HR, ITSM and warehouses; Turing Project Lazarus lists Communications, tickets, wikis, databases and code; code not required and not bought alone. Ask each which subset has active demand before preparing exports.

Centific: source 1 ↗ source 2 ↗ source 3 ↗ Turing Project Lazarus: source 1 ↗ Public descriptions, not tested seller outcomes.

Payment trigger

Centific: Most partnerships reach first accepted contribution in 6–10 weeks; payment on acceptance. Acceptance estimate is not a payout SLA. Turing Project Lazarus: Intake call within one business day; valuation usually within a week of access. Neither is a payout deadline. These clocks measure different stages, not equivalent payout deadlines; ask for a written acceptance-to-payment interval.

Centific: source 1 ↗ source 2 ↗ source 3 ↗ Turing Project Lazarus: source 1 ↗ Public descriptions, not tested seller outcomes.

Shared diligence, not shared guarantees.

Both routes need lawful rights to the material. Removing names does not remove confidentiality obligations or re-identification risk. Require sample approval, buyer-use restrictions, precise payment triggers and downstream retention/deletion terms.

Seller-outcome evidence

Centific: No independently audited operating-business payout established in this research. Provider cases and partnership confirmations do not establish a typical seller outcome.

Turing Project Lazarus: No independently audited operating-business payout established in this research. Provider cases and partnership confirmations do not establish a typical seller outcome.

Put two routes side by side.

Choose two different providers. No income ranking.

Sources & unknowns.

Source claims were inspected on 13 October 2026. No intake was submitted or transaction tested. Unknowns are not zero fees, universal eligibility or unrestricted rights.

Read the evidence and indexing methodology →