GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › AppFollow · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

AppFollow

19Judge labels

3First choices

1Negative labels

9 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

9 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. AppFollow was named 9 times in Mobile apps and 1 other category, where Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns led with 15%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business7 of 139

under the label threshold

Mid-market12 of 136

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In mobile apps · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named AppFollow for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Mobile apps	Marketing	2%	12 of 136	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns at 15%
Review and reputation management	Marketing	0%	37 of 103	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Birdeye at 26%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for AppFollow yet. The next is due October 1, 2026. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated AppFollow across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	2	1	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	0	1

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained9 labels3

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative19 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“AppFollow | Free (2 apps) → $29/mo | Best overall value; includes AI features” Kimi K2 · Mobile apps · budget prompt · first choice

“AppFollow offers a generous free plan for tracking keyword rankings, review management, and competitor insights.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Mobile apps · budget prompt · alternative

“AppFollow (free plan: 2 apps, keyword tracking, review monitoring)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Mobile apps · budget prompt · alternative

“Appfollow – free tier tracks 2 apps + up to 1,000 keywords” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Mobile apps · budget prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as AppFollow, over the 19 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AppFollow was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

OneSignal10 of 193Not in the top three

AppsFlyer10 of 191Not in the top three

App Radar7 of 193Not in the top three

Google App Campaigns7 of 193Not in the top three

Adjust7 of 190Not in the top three

AppLovin7 of 190Not in the top three

Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns6 of 193Not in the top three

Appfigures6 of 191Not in the top three

Apple Search Ads6 of 191Not in the top three

Branch6 of 191Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named AppFollow. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 1 of the 19 answers that named AppFollow and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

adlibrary.com1

apsteq.com1

capterra.com1

dash.app1

didoo.ai1

f6s.com1

findmarketingtools.com1

gartner.com1

gitnux.org1

guideflow.com1

Ten of the ten domain citations in answers naming AppFollow came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

adlibrary.com/posts/best-mobile-advertising-apps1

apsteq.com/blog/app-marketing-tools1

capterra.com/mobile-marketing-software/s/small-businesses1

dash.app/blog/top-marketing-apps-small-business1

didoo.ai/blog/15-best-mkt-apps-for-global-smes-affordable-growth-engines1

f6s.com/software/category/mobile-app-marketing1

findmarketingtools.com/app-marketing1

gartner.com/reviews/market/mobile-marketing-platforms1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as AppFollow

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as AppFollow; a claim can dispute any of them.

Appfollow 1

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when AppFollow's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as AppFollow, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at appfollow.io is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.