AI Indexes
GTM AI Index
Index › Sales › Intent data › RB2B vs 6sense
B2B intent data providers · October 2026 Edition

RB2B vs 6sense

Zero of fourteen models named RB2B first on the direct prompt; two named 6sense. RB2B was named by eight of the fourteen models and 6sense by fourteen and RB2B carries 14 labels and 6sense 64, so the shares are not directly comparable.

RB2B

accepted challenger

Named in five categories this edition.

6sense

criticized challenger

Named in twenty-three categories this edition.

First-choice share5%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%41%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#6#7A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1464A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, RB2B reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Bombora was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Apollo.io vs RB2B · Apollo.io vs 6sense · Bombora vs RB2B

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 B2B intent data providers page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
RB2BFirst choices, of fourteen models6sense
Direct025 against 6sense
Paraphrase013 against 6sense
Comparative04
Budget-constrained308 against 6sense
Scale-constrained001 against 6sense
Negative009 against 6sense
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 RB2B and 6sense 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
RB2B 6sense first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, RB2B on the left and 6sense on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where RB2B and 6sense stood in it.

6sense first, RB2B not the choice

2 of 14 modelsRB2B was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Perplexity Sonar6sense alternatives: Apollo.io, Dealfront, Demandbase
MiniMax M2.56sense alternatives: Bombora, Dealfront, Demandbase, G2 Buyer Intent, Prospeo, TrustRadius, ZoomInfo Streaming Intent

Neither was the first choice, one was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
GPT-5.4 miniBombora alternatives: 6sense, G2 Buyer Intent
Gemini 3.5 FlashZoomInfo alternatives: Bombora, Cognism, Factors.ai, RB2B
Mistral SmallDealfront, Factors.ai alternatives: 6sense, Lusha
Qwen 3.7 FlashBombora alternatives: 6sense, Datanyze, Demandbase, ZoomInfo
GPT-6 LunaBombora alternatives: 6sense, G2 Buyer Intent

Neither was named

7 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Apollo Intent, Dealfront, Factors.ai, Intentsify
Grok 4.1 FastBombora alternatives: AdRoll ABM, G2 Buyer Intent, Intentsify, Warmly
DeepSeek V4 FlashBombora alternatives: G2 Buyer Intent, Intentsify, ZoomInfo
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2Dealfront, ZoomInfo alternatives: Bombora, G2 Buyer Intent
GLM 4.7 FlashXFactors.ai alternatives: Bombora, Dealfront, G2 Buyer Intent
Muse Glimmer 30BDealfront, Factors.ai alternatives: Warmly

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
RB2B leads by four points.
RB2B4%#5 of 14
6sense0%#14 of 14
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
RB2B5%#6 of 13
6sense5%#7 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: 6sense leads at enterprise.
6sense44%#1 of 9
RB2B0%#– of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about RB2B

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

“I'd recommend RB2B if you have meaningful website traffic and want person-level identification” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“If you have zero budget but some website traffic: Set up RB2B (for US traffic)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“the practical stack is usually Apollo.io or RB2B for coverage” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about 6sense

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

“If you want a single recommendation, 6sense is the strongest default pick for a mid-market B2B company” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Apollo.io vs RB2BApollo.io vs 6senseBombora vs RB2BBombora vs 6senseDealfront vs RB2BDealfront vs 6senseFactors.ai vs RB2BFactors.ai vs 6senseZoomInfo vs RB2BZoomInfo vs 6senseRB2B vs G2 Buyer Intent6sense vs G2 Buyer IntentAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full intent data standing

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.