Every category where a model named Apple Search Ads 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	0%	18 of 136	0%	16	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Apple Search Ads 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 Apple Search Ads 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	1	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	0	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	1
Mistral Small	1	0	1	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	2	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	1	2
Kimi K2	1	0	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative6 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained7 labels1

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative14 labels9not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative29 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 11 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.

“Focus: Apple Search Ads (40–55% of spend) for highest-intent traffic and cleanest data” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Mobile apps · comparative prompt · first choice

“Safer platforms to prioritize ... Apple Search Ads (<1% fraud)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Mobile apps · negative prompt · first choice

“Apple Search Ads (high-quality traffic, lower fraud risk)” Mistral Small · Mobile apps · negative prompt · first choice

“Apple Search Ads | <1% | Gold standard for iOS” Kimi K2 · Mobile apps · negative prompt · first choice

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 Apple Search Ads, over the 29 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Apple Search Ads was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

AppsFlyer24 of 297Not in the top three

Adjust20 of 293Not in the top three

Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns19 of 291Not in the top three

Google App Campaigns17 of 291Not in the top three

TikTok Ads17 of 290Not in the top three

OneSignal14 of 293Not in the top three

Branch14 of 290Not in the top three

Singular13 of 291Not in the top three

AppLovin12 of 290Not in the top three

Braze9 of 292Not 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 Apple Search Ads. 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 4 of the 29 answers that named Apple Search Ads and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com3

remarkably-different.com3

arpubrothers.com2

cheq.ai2

finnpartners.com2

impact.com2

indieappsanta.com2

indiemedia.club2

markovate.com2

mobisoftinfotech.com2

Twenty-two of the twenty-two domain citations in answers naming Apple Search Ads came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/mobile-marketing-platforms3

arpubrothers.com/blog/10-mobile-app-marketing-mistakes2

cheq.ai/blog/mobile-app-advertising-pros-cons2

finnpartners.com/uk/news-insights/app-marketing-mistakes2

impact.com/marketing-intelligence/mobile-app-fraud-prevention2

indieappsanta.com/2025/11/21/the-best-alternatives-to-appsumo-for-mobile-app-promotions-an2

indiemedia.club/tools/best-mobile-advertising-platform2

markovate.com/blog/app-marketing-mistakes-infographics2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Apple Search Ads

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

Apple Search Ads (ASA) 2Apple Search Ads (Basic) 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 Apple Search Ads'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 Apple Search Ads, 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 applesearchads.com 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.