AI Indexes
GTM AI Index
Index › Marketing › Mobile & push › Omnisend vs Airship
Mobile marketing and push · October 2026 Edition

Omnisend vs Airship

Zero of fourteen models named Omnisend first on the direct prompt; zero named Airship. Omnisend was named by eight of the fourteen models and Airship by thirteen and Omnisend carries 12 labels and Airship 29, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Omnisend

accepted challenger

Lithuania, founded 2014. Named in eight categories this edition.

Airship

accepted challenger

Portland, United States, founded 2009. Named in four categories this edition.

First-choice share4%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate8%24%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#8A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels1229A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Omnisend reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.OneSignal was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. OneSignal vs Omnisend · OneSignal vs Airship · Customer.io vs Omnisend

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 mobile marketing and push page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
OmnisendFirst choices, of fourteen modelsAirship
Direct001 against Airship
Paraphrase101 against Omnisend · 2 against Airship
Comparative02
Budget-constrained10
Scale-constrained011 against Airship
Negative003 against Airship
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 Omnisend and Airship 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
Omnisend Airship first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Omnisend on the left and Airship on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Omnisend and Airship stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
GPT-5.4 miniBraze alternatives: Airship, Iterable, OneSignal

Neither was named

13 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5Customer.io alternatives: ActiveCampaign, Courier, OneSignal, Pushwoosh, Vero
Gemini 3.5 FlashCustomer.io, Sakari alternatives: ActiveCampaign, OneSignal
Perplexity SonarOneSignal alternatives: Attentive, CleverTap, Insider, MoEngage
Grok 4.1 FastCustomer.io alternatives: Braze, OneSignal, Pushwoosh, Vero
Mistral SmallOneSignal, Pushwoosh alternatives: Insider
DeepSeek V4 FlashOneSignal alternatives: Customer.io, Twilio Programmable Messaging
Llama 4 MaverickPushwoosh alternatives: Attentive, Klaviyo
Qwen 3.7 FlashCustomer.io alternatives: Braze, HubSpot Marketing Hub
Kimi K2OneSignal alternatives: ActiveCampaign, Customer.io, Iterable
GLM 4.7 FlashXCustomer.io alternatives: OneSignal
MiniMax M2.5OneSignal alternatives: Braze, MoEngage, Salesforce Marketing Cloud, Twilio Programmable Messaging
GPT-6 LunaCustomer.io Journeys alternatives: Braze, OneSignal
Muse Glimmer 30BCustomer.io alternatives: Braze, Iterable

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
Omnisend leads by five points.
Omnisend5%#3 of 18
Airship0%#17 of 18
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Omnisend leads by two points.
Omnisend4%#5 of 14
Airship2%#8 of 14
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Airship leads at enterprise.
Airship3%#4 of 12
Omnisend0%#– of 12
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Omnisend

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

“Avoid e-comm focused ones like Omnisend/Klaviyo (better for B2C retail).” Grok 4.1 Fast · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

What the models said about Airship

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

“Avoid Braze and Airship unless you have enterprise-level budgets” DeepSeek V4 Flash · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Labeled "enterprise giant" to avoid; poor fit for lean teams.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · hard negative
“An enterprise-grade platform known for its reliability and security.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Airship is the enterprise standard for mobile push notifications” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
“OneSignal/Braze/Airship for balance” Grok 4.1 Fast · 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.