Content marketing platforms
Asked as “content marketing platform”, and as “content planning and production tool for marketing teams”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B software company. 54 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, six models each.
Standing · first-choice share
33%
Contested · CoSchedule Marketing Suite 9%
33HubSpot Content Hub09CoSchedule Marketing Suite09HubSpot Marketing Hub48others
33% of first choices, contested.
Since September 2026▲+4Since September 2026: 30% → 34%, +4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.HubSpot Content Hub held the lead, +4 points on 30%, inside the 12-point 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
HubSpot Content Hub33%7%45endorsed leader▲+4Since September 2026: 30% → 34%, +4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.30% → 34%
HubSpot Content Hub33%7%45endorsed leader▲+4Since September 2026: 30% → 34%, +4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.30% → 34%02
CoSchedule Marketing Suite9%0%29accepted challenger▼−3Since September 2026: 12% → 9%, −3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 9%
CoSchedule Marketing Suite9%0%29accepted challenger▼−3Since September 2026: 12% → 9%, −3 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.12% → 9%03
StoryChief7%0%16accepted challenger▼−1Since September 2026: 7% → 6%, −1 point. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.7% → 6%
StoryChief7%0%16accepted challenger▼−1Since September 2026: 7% → 6%, −1 point. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.7% → 6%04
Semrush Content Marketing Platform4%7%30accepted challenger▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 4%
Semrush Content Marketing Platform4%7%30accepted challenger▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 4%05
Canva4%0%12accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 4%
Canva4%0%12accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 4%06
Contently2%18%33accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Contently2%18%33accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%07
Buffer2%0%13accepted challenger▼−5Since September 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.5% → 0%
Buffer2%0%13accepted challenger▼−5Since September 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.5% → 0%Show the three products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
10
Optimizely CMP0%18%11accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Optimizely CMP0%18%11accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%08
Ahrefs0%0%10accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Ahrefs0%0%10accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%09
Sprinklr Marketing0%0%10accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Sprinklr Marketing0%0%10accepted 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.
Head to head
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 →
01020304050607080910Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative50%
Key
01HubSpot Content Hub33%
HubSpot Content Hub33%02CoSchedule Marketing Suite9%
CoSchedule Marketing Suite9%03StoryChief7%
StoryChief7%04Semrush Content Marketing Platform4%
Semrush Content Marketing Platform4%05Canva4%
Canva4%06Contently2%
Contently2%07Buffer2%
Buffer2%08Ahrefs0%
Ahrefs0%09Sprinklr Marketing0%
Sprinklr Marketing0%10Optimizely CMP0%
Optimizely CMP0%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.
Contently18%
6 of 33 labels negative · 4 of 6 models
“Pricing is custom-quoted and often starts at £20K–£100K+/year — likely overkill unless you have enterprise-level budget.” DeepSeek V4 Flash, paraphrase prompt
HubSpot Content Hub7%
3 of 45 labels negative · 3 of 6 models
“Certain all-in-one platforms like HubSpot or Semrush are powerful but come with steep learning curves and premium pricing, making them less suitable for small teams or solo marketers.” Mistral Small, negative prompt
Acquia60%
3 of 5 labels negative · 2 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“Dropped out of Gartner's Magic Quadrant entirely in 2025 ... their absence is a significant red flag” DeepSeek V4 Flash, negative prompt
Skyword75%
3 of 4 labels negative · 2 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“Caution level: High ... Lost its Leader status ... Expensive — starting around $5,000/month” DeepSeek V4 Flash, negative 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. 1048 links across 320 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 · HubSpot51 answers · 84 citations · 13 models
41 answers · 52 citations · 12 models
29 answers · 39 citations · 11 models
20 answers · 20 citations · 10 models
18 answers · 18 citations · 8 models
vendor site · ClickUp15 answers · 17 citations · 8 models
14 answers · 26 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Gartner13 answers · 17 citations · 8 models
vendor site · ZoomInfo13 answers · 14 citations · 9 models
vendor site · StoryChief12 answers · 20 citations · 8 models
12 answers · 12 citations · 8 models
vendor site · HubSpot11 answers · 19 citations · 8 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.
29 answers · 12 models
28 answers · 11 models
26 answers · 11 models
20 answers · 10 models
18 answers · 8 models
15 answers · 8 models
14 answers · 8 models
13 answers · 8 models
13 answers · 9 models
11 answers · 6 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 content marketing platform”, “content marketing 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HubSpot parent site HubSpot Content Hub 33%, HubSpot Marketing Hub 9%, HubSpot for Marketers 2% | 44% | 934 | 368,000 | 9,776 | |||
| CoSchedule Marketing Suite coschedule.com | 9% | 77 | 20 | 0 | 38,502 | 1 | |
| StoryChief storychief.io | 7% | 61 | 320 | 5 | 29,114 | ||
| Semrush parent site Semrush Content Marketing Platform 4% | 4% | 69 | 90,500 | 2,055 | |||
| Canva canva.com | 4% | 137 | 24,900,000 | 183,421 | 81,177,765 | 101 | |
| ClickUp clickup.com | 4% | 202 | 201,000 | 1,733 | 322,021 | $1,470 | 120 |
| Contentoo contentoo.com | 4% | 3 | |||||
| Contently contently.com | 2% | 94 | 3,600 | 128,668 | 5,244 | ||
| Buffer buffer.com | 2% | 227 | 90,500 | 35,151 | 966,256 | 18 | |
| WordPress wordpress.com | 2% | 203 | 201,000 | 42,406 | 49,847,649 | $18 | 13 |
Google's top ten for the two searches hold 15 sites; 0 of them are among the sites the models cited here. The first result for “best content marketing platform” is adroitte.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 content marketing platform for a mid-market B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which content planning and production tool for marketing teams would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B company?”Comparative“What are the top content marketing platforms and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best content marketing platform for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a content marketing platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which content marketing 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
Adobe AEM read as Adobe Experience Manager
CoSchedule read as CoSchedule Marketing Suite
CoSchedule (Marketing Suite) read as CoSchedule Marketing Suite
HubSpot read as HubSpot Content Hub
HubSpot (Content Hub & Marketing Hub) read as HubSpot Content Hub
HubSpot (Free & Starter Tiers) read as HubSpot Content Hub
HubSpot (Free Tier) read as HubSpot Content Hub
HubSpot's free tier read as HubSpot Content Hub
LinkedIn read as LinkedIn articles
Optimizely Content Marketing Platform read as Optimizely CMP
Optimizely Content Marketing Platform (CMP) read as Optimizely CMP
SEMrush read as Semrush Content Marketing Platform
Semrush read as Semrush Content Marketing Platform
Semrush (Content Marketing Platform) read as Semrush Content Marketing Platform
Semrush (Content Marketing Toolkit) read as Semrush Content Marketing Platform
Semrush Content Toolkit read as Semrush Content Marketing Platform
Sprinklr read as Sprinklr Marketing
Unresolved, counted raw
Acquia
Adintent.net
Adobe
Adobe (GenStudio)
Adobe Content Supply Chain
AdsGram.ai
Buffer Free Plan
Canva Free Plan
Content360
Contentive
Contra
Ghost CMS
Google Docs & Google Analytics
Google's Free Ecosystem
Hemingway
HubSpot Free Plan
Kadence International
Koala AI
Luminati
Madwire / Marketing 360
Parse.ly
Salesforce + Pardot
Scribus
Semrush Content Marketing Toolkit
Sitecore Digital Experience Platform (DXP)
WordPress with Yoast SEO
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.