AI Indexes
GTM AI Index
Index › Marketing › Reviews › BrightLocal vs Grade.us
Review and reputation management · October 2026 Edition

BrightLocal vs Grade.us

Zero of fourteen models named BrightLocal first on the direct prompt; one named Grade.us. BrightLocal was named by ten of the fourteen models and Grade.us by eight and BrightLocal carries 14 labels and Grade.us 12, so the shares are not directly comparable.

BrightLocal

accepted challenger

Named in three categories this edition.

Grade.us

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share2%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%8%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#6A position in a field of 9; printed, not drawn.
Labels1412A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, BrightLocal reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Birdeye was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Birdeye vs BrightLocal · Birdeye vs Grade.us · ReviewTrackers vs BrightLocal

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 review and reputation 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.
BrightLocalFirst choices, of fourteen modelsGrade.us
Direct01
Paraphrase00
Comparative00
Budget-constrained101 against Grade.us
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
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 BrightLocal and Grade.us 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
BrightLocal Grade.us first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, BrightLocal on the left and Grade.us on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where BrightLocal and Grade.us stood in it.

Grade.us first, BrightLocal not the choice

1 of 14 modelsBrightLocal was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Llama 4 MaverickBazaarvoice, Grade.us, ReviewTrackers

Neither was the first choice, one was named

3 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Mistral SmallBazaarvoice, ReviewTrackers alternatives: Grade.us, Podium
DeepSeek V4 FlashBirdeye alternatives: Grade.us, Reputation, Yext
MiniMax M2.5Birdeye, Podium alternatives: Capterra, G2 Buyer Intent, Grade.us, Reputation

Neither was named

10 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5G2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Capterra, Clutch, Reviewflowz, TrustRadius
GPT-5.4 miniG2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Birdeye, Reputation
Gemini 3.5 FlashReviewflowz alternatives: Birdeye, HiFiveStar, Sprout Social, Trustpilot
Perplexity SonarReputation alternatives: Birdeye, Reviewflowz
Grok 4.1 FastBirdeye alternatives: Podium, ReviewTrackers, Trustpilot, Yotpo
Qwen 3.7 FlashBirdeye, Pulse alternatives: Reviewflowz, TrustRadius, TrustSpot
Kimi K2ReviewTrackers alternatives: G2 Marketing Solutions, Reviewflowz
GLM 4.7 FlashXReviewTrackers alternatives: Capterra, G2 Buyer Intent
GPT-6 LunaG2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Birdeye, Reputation
Muse Glimmer 30BReviewTrackers alternatives: Birdeye, G2 Marketing Solutions, Podium, Trustpilot

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
BrightLocal leads by two points.
BrightLocal5%#4 of 11
Grade.us4%#– of 11
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
BrightLocal2%#4 of 9
Grade.us2%#6 of 9
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Grade.us leads at enterprise.
Grade.us2%#– of 9
BrightLocal0%#– of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about BrightLocal

No label in this category carried a quote.

What the models said about Grade.us

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

“However, pricing has increased recently (now starting at $180/month for Professional plans in some cases)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · soft negative
“The best online review management platform for a mid-market B2B company is ReviewTrackers, Grade.us, or Bazaarvoice.” Llama 4 Maverick · direct prompt · first choice
“For agencies needing white-label solutions: Grade.us offers strong reporting and branding options” MiniMax M2.5 · comparative prompt · alternative
“A mid-market-focused platform with strong white-label options and agency-friendly workflows.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · alternative
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.