Consent and privacy management
Asked as “consent management platform”, and as “cookie consent and privacy compliance tool”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B software company. 51 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, six models each.
Standing · first-choice share
31%
Contested · CookieYes 16%
31Osano16CookieYes12Cookiebot41others
31% of first choices, contested.
Since September 2026↗new leaderNew leader since September 2026: Osano (27%) replaces Enzuzo (25% then, 9% now), 18 points clear, past the 12-point floor.Osano leads at 27%, replacing Enzuzo, which led at 25% and stands at 9% now: 18 points clear, past the floor.
The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all six models, for a mid-market B2B software company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
01
Osano31%4%48endorsed leader▲+9Since September 2026: 19% → 27%, +9 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.19% → 27%
Osano31%4%48endorsed leader▲+9Since September 2026: 19% → 27%, +9 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.19% → 27%02
CookieYes16%4%27accepted challenger▼−3Since September 2026: 17% → 14%, −3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.17% → 14%
CookieYes16%4%27accepted challenger▼−3Since September 2026: 17% → 14%, −3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.17% → 14%03
Cookiebot12%12%50accepted challenger▲+3Since September 2026: 10% → 14%, +3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 14%
Cookiebot12%12%50accepted challenger▲+3Since September 2026: 10% → 14%, +3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 14%04
Usercentrics CMP8%7%42accepted challenger▲+5Since September 2026: 4% → 9%, +5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 9%
Usercentrics CMP8%7%42accepted challenger▲+5Since September 2026: 4% → 9%, +5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 9%05
Enzuzo8%0%14accepted challenger▼−16Since September 2026: 25% → 9%, −16 points. Past the 12-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.25% → 9%
Enzuzo8%0%14accepted challenger▼−16Since September 2026: 25% → 9%, −16 points. Past the 12-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.25% → 9%06
consentmanager8%13%15accepted challenger▲+5Since September 2026: 2% → 7%, +5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 7%
consentmanager8%13%15accepted challenger▲+5Since September 2026: 2% → 7%, +5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 7%07
Termly4%18%11accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 6% → 5%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 5%
Termly4%18%11accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 6% → 5%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 5%08
Ketch2%5%22accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Ketch2%5%22accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%09
iubenda2%0%19accepted challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 6% → 2%, −4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 2%
iubenda2%0%19accepted challenger▼−4Since September 2026: 6% → 2%, −4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 2%10
Quantcast Choice2%10%10accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Quantcast Choice2%10%10accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%Show the three products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
13
OneTrust0%53%49criticized challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%
OneTrust0%53%49criticized challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%12
TrustArc0%22%23accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
TrustArc0%22%23accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%11
Didomi0%16%25accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Didomi0%16%25accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%The floor is 12 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
All six head-to-head pages: the top four products, each against each
Recommended versus criticized
Every product with at least 10 labels here, on both axes. The 30% line names a quadrant, not the verdict above: that one needs more than 40%.
Criticized challengerCriticized default
Negative label rate →
01020304050607080910111213Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative50%
Key
01Osano31%
Osano31%02CookieYes16%
CookieYes16%03Cookiebot12%
Cookiebot12%04Usercentrics CMP8%
Usercentrics CMP8%05Enzuzo8%
Enzuzo8%06consentmanager8%
consentmanager8%07Termly4%
Termly4%08Ketch2%
Ketch2%09iubenda2%
iubenda2%10Quantcast Choice2%
Quantcast Choice2%11Didomi0%
Didomi0%12TrustArc0%
TrustArc0%13OneTrust0%
OneTrust0%What they warned about
A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
OneTrust53%
26 of 49 labels negative · 11 of 6 models · 8 hard negative
“What to Avoid for Mid-Sized B2B: **OneTrust**: Enterprise-focused ($10,000+ minimum), overly complex for mid-market needs” MiniMax M2.5, paraphrase prompt
Cookiebot12%
6 of 50 labels negative · 5 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“**Cost at scale**: Per-domain billing charges subdomains separately; reviewers note it "stacks fast"” Grok 4.20, negative prompt
TrustArc22%
5 of 23 labels negative · 4 of 6 models · 2 hard negative
“What to Avoid for Mid-Sized B2B: - **TrustArc**: Best for large enterprises with certification needs” MiniMax M2.5, paraphrase prompt
Didomi16%
4 of 25 labels negative · 3 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“**OneTrust & Didomi:** Enterprise-focused... Not realistic for small budgets.” DeepSeek V4 Flash, budget prompt
What they cite
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list: fourteen of the six in this edition.
Sites the answers cite
78 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 6 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 1044 links across 180 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. None of the 36 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category.
vendor site · Enzuzo50 answers · 96 citations · 12 models
vendor site · Osano43 answers · 69 citations · 12 models
vendor site · Usercentrics38 answers · 56 citations · 13 models
32 answers · 32 citations · 10 models
29 answers · 54 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Consently29 answers · 37 citations · 11 models
27 answers · 40 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Secure Privacy26 answers · 34 citations · 9 models
23 answers · 23 citations · 10 models
22 answers · 26 citations · 10 models
vendor site · Ketch21 answers · 25 citations · 8 models
21 answers · 21 citations · 10 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
36 answers · 11 models
34 answers · 11 models
32 answers · 10 models
23 answers · 10 models
22 answers · 10 models
22 answers · 10 models
22 answers · 10 models
19 answers · 9 models
18 answers · 9 models
16 answers · 8 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best consent management platform”, “consent management platform”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days | Best Google position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Osano osano.com | 31% | 107 | 2,400 | 28 | 36,277 | 46 | 3 | |
| CookieYes cookieyes.com | 16% | 90 | 2,900 | 25 | 32,291 | 42 | ||
| Cookiebot cookiebot.com | 12% | 118 | 3,600 | 76 | 12,326 | $234 | 120 | |
| Usercentrics CMP usercentrics.com Usercentrics CMP 8%, Usercentrics Cookiebot CMP 2% | 10% | 106 | 30 | 0 | 67,472 | $494 | 36 | 6 |
| Enzuzo enzuzo.com | 8% | 35 | 320 | 1 | 11,682 | 1 | 1 | |
| consentmanager consentmanager.net | 8% | 26 | 170 | 0 | 427 | 0 | ||
| Termly termly.io | 4% | 55 | 5,400 | 62 | 245,341 | 35 | 8 | |
| Ketch ketch.com | 2% | 76 | 12,100 | 1,275 | 6,612 | 46 | 4 | |
| iubenda iubenda.com | 2% | 64 | 1,600 | 23 | 149,415 | 46 | ||
| Quantcast Choice quantcast.com | 2% | 14 | 20 | 0 | 4,244 | 30 |
Google's top ten for the two searches hold 16 sites; 6 of them are among the sites the models cited here (enzuzo.com, g2.com, ketch.com, osano.com, secureprivacy.ai, usercentrics.com). The first result for “best consent management platform” is enzuzo.com.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best consent management platform for a mid-market B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which cookie consent and privacy compliance tool would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B company?”Comparative“What are the top consent management platforms and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best consent management platform for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a consent management platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which consent management platforms should I avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Opus 5no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Claude Opus 4.8no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-6 Astrano first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-5.6 Solno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Gemini 3.1 Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Perplexity Sonar Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Bold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency. Full answer text is in the free responses file. Download the record
Zero rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
Quantcast read as Quantcast Choice
Usercentrics read as Usercentrics CMP
Usercentrics (including Cookiebot) read as Usercentrics CMP
Usercentrics (standalone) read as Usercentrics CMP
Unresolved, counted raw
Clarip
Clickio
ConsentKit
Consenti
Cookie First
CookieMan
IAB Transparency and Consent Framework (TCF)
InMobi Choice (formerly Quantcast Choice)
OneTrust CMP
Orbee
Osano Fides
Vectaury
gdprcookies.net
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.