AI Indexes
GTM AI Index
Index › Marketing › Local listings › Semrush Local vs Birdeye
Local listings management · October 2026 Edition

Semrush Local vs Birdeye

One of fourteen models named Semrush Local first on the direct prompt; one named Birdeye. Semrush Local was named by twelve of the fourteen models and Birdeye by fourteen and Semrush Local carries 31 labels and Birdeye 34, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Semrush Local

accepted challenger

By Semrush, Boston, United States, founded 2008. Named in two categories this edition.

Birdeye

accepted challenger

Named in eight categories this edition.

First-choice share4%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate13%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#8A position in a field of 10; printed, not drawn.
Labels3134A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Semrush Local reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Synup was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. BrightLocal vs Semrush Local · BrightLocal vs Birdeye · Moz Local vs Semrush Local

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the local listings management page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Semrush LocalFirst choices, of fourteen modelsBirdeye
Direct11
Paraphrase10
Comparative00
Budget-constrained002 against Semrush Local
Scale-constrained001 against Semrush Local
Negative001 against Semrush Local · 4 against Birdeye
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Semrush Local and Birdeye stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Semrush Local Birdeye first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Semrush Local on the left and Birdeye on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Semrush Local and Birdeye stood in it.

Semrush Local first, Birdeye not the choice

1 of 14 modelsBirdeye was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Gemini 3.5 FlashSemrush Local alternatives: BrightLocal, Synup, Whitespark

Birdeye first, Semrush Local not the choice

1 of 14 modelsSemrush Local was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Mistral SmallBirdeye, Yext alternatives: Moz Local, Synup

Neither was the first choice, one was named

4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5Yext alternatives: Birdeye, BrightLocal, SOCi, Synup
DeepSeek V4 FlashBrightLocal alternatives: Semrush Local, Synup, Uberall
Llama 4 MaverickBrightLocal Track, Synup alternatives: Birdeye, Moz Local, Yext
GLM 4.7 FlashXBrightLocal alternatives: LocaliQ, Semrush Local, Yext

Neither was named

8 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniYext alternatives: Uberall
Perplexity SonarSynup alternatives: BrightLocal, Semrush Listing Management, Uberall, Yext
Grok 4.1 FastBrightLocal alternatives: Moz Local, Synup, Yext
Qwen 3.7 FlashSynup alternatives: BrightLocal, Uberall
Kimi K2BrightLocal alternatives: SOCi, Semrush Listing Management, Synup
MiniMax M2.5BrightLocal alternatives: Synup, Yext
GPT-6 LunaBrightLocal alternatives: Yext
Muse Glimmer 30BBrightLocal, Synup alternatives: Semrush Listing Management

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Level: the same share of first choices.
Semrush Local0%#5 of 9
Birdeye0%#7 of 9
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Semrush Local leads by two points.
Semrush Local4%#5 of 10
Birdeye2%#8 of 10
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Birdeye leads at enterprise.
Birdeye9%#3 of 9
Semrush Local0%#6 of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Semrush Local

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“Semrush Local Pro is another option, but it's listed at $60/month per location billed annually, so it costs more for listings management alone.” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · soft negative
“though it may lack some of the advanced enterprise workflow permissions of a standalone Yext/Uberall” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · soft negative
“Semrush Local starts at $30/mo per location billed annually ... but these are generally pricier” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · soft negative
“I'd most likely recommend Semrush Local as the default choice.” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“adding Semrush Local is almost always the most efficient path” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“The integration with your existing keyword and competitive research data reduces tool sprawl, though multi-location workflows aren't as robust” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · alternative

What the models said about Birdeye

No label in this category carried a quote.

Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.