GTM AI Index
Index Marketing Mobile apps › Customer.io vs MoEngage
Mobile apps · September 2026 Edition

Customer.io vs MoEngage

Two of twelve models named Customer.io first on the direct prompt; one named MoEngage. Customer.io was named by eight of the twelve models and MoEngage by eight and Customer.io carries 12 labels and MoEngage 17, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Customer.io

accepted challenger

Named in seven categories this edition.

MoEngage

accepted challenger

founded 2014. Named in six categories this edition.

First-choice share15%7%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#8A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels1217A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Customer.io reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Braze was named alongside these two in seven of the twelve direct answers. Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns vs Customer.io · Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns vs MoEngage · Customer.io vs CleverTap

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve 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 mobile apps page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Customer.ioFirst choices, of twelve modelsMoEngage
Direct21
Paraphrase512 against MoEngage
Comparative00
Budget-constrained00
Scale-constrained01
Negative00
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.

Every model, every framing

The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Customer.io and MoEngage 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
Customer.io MoEngage first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Customer.io on the left and MoEngage on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Customer.io and MoEngage stood in it.

Customer.io first, MoEngage an alternative

2 of 12 modelsMoEngage was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Gemini 3.5 FlashCustomer.io alternatives: Appcues, AppsFlyer, Branch, MoEngage, Pendo
Qwen 3.7 FlashCustomer.io alternatives: Braze, HubSpot

MoEngage first, Customer.io an alternative

1 of 12 modelsCustomer.io was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Perplexity SonarHubSpot Marketing Hub, MoEngage alternatives: Braze, Customer.io

Neither was the first choice, one was named

2 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice alternatives: Acoustic, Braze, Customer.io, MoEngage
DeepSeek V4 FlashOneSignal alternatives: Customer.io, MoEngage

Neither was named

7 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniBraze alternatives: CleverTap, Iterable, OneSignal
Grok 4.1 FastAppsFlyer alternatives: Adjust, Branch, Singular
Mistral SmallBraze, CleverTap alternatives: Adobe Marketo Engage, AppsFlyer, Firebase, Insider, OneSignal
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2HubSpot Marketing Hub alternatives: 6sense Revenue AI, Airship, Braze, OneSignal
GLM 4.7 FlashXAppsFlyer alternatives: Adjust, Branch, Braze
MiniMax M2.5OneSignal alternatives: Acoustic, Google Ads

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
Customer.io leads by four points.
Customer.io4%#6 of 12
MoEngage0%#– of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Customer.io leads by nine points.
Customer.io15%#2 of 16
MoEngage7%#8 of 16
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Customer.io4%#– of 11
MoEngage4%#4 of 11
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Customer.io

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

“Best Overall for B2B SaaS & Product-Led Growth: Customer.io ... widely considered the sweet spot for mid-market B2B companies” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about MoEngage

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

“CleverTap and MoEngage are heavily tailored to B2C e-commerce” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“I would recommend MoEngage *if your main need is mobile engagement and growth across push, in-app, and lifecycle messaging*” Perplexity Sonar · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Want omnichannel journeys, built-in analytics, mid-market pricing | MoEngage, CleverTap, WebEngage” Kimi K2 · scale prompt · first choice
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.