Reputation vs ReviewGrower
Zero of twelve models named Reputation first on the direct prompt; zero named ReviewGrower. Reputation was named by twelve of the twelve models and ReviewGrower by eight and Reputation carries 37 labels and ReviewGrower 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
By Reputation.com, Redwood City, United States, founded 2006. Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
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 review and reputation management page.
By framing
ReputationFirst choices, of twelve modelsReviewGrower
Across every category in the September 2026 Edition, Reputation and ReviewGrower were named in the same answer twenty-two times, of the 108 answers naming Reputation and the 35 naming ReviewGrower. In those answers ReviewGrower took the first choice six times and Reputation one.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | | |
Reputation ReviewGrower first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Reputation on the left and ReviewGrower on the right.The direct prompt
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.Neither was named
10 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
ReviewGrower2%#6 of 11Reputation0%#10 of 11Reputation4%#4 of 14ReviewGrower4%#5 of 14Reputation18%#2 of 8ReviewGrower2%#– of 8What the models said about Reputation
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Frequent Trustpilot accusations of scams, undelivered services ... Users report it as "flawed" for reputation tracking.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Birdeye and Reputation.com unless you have many physical locations” DeepSeek V4 Flash · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Avoid if budget is tight: Podium, Birdeye, Weave, and Reputation.com” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“2. Reputation.com - Best for Enterprise Multi-Location ... Deep analytics and enterprise capabilities” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend Birdeye or Reputation.com as top reputation management tools.” Grok 4.1 Fast · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Need everything in one place? → Birdeye or Reputation.com.” GPT-5.4 mini · comparative prompt · first choice
What the models said about ReviewGrower
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“good value, transparent pricing ($9.95/location/month), free plan, white-label included” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · first choice
“ReviewGrower stands out as the best online review management platform” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · first choice
“ReviewGrower – Best Overall Value” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
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.