Every category where a model named AppLovin 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%	136 of 136	56%	16	criticized challenger
Programmatic and display advertising	Marketing	0%	29 of 96	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by StackAdapt at 61%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for AppLovin 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 AppLovin across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative9 labelsNone

Budget-constrained9 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative10 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative28 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“major, vetted networks (e.g., Apple Search Ads, Google App Campaigns, Meta, TikTok, Unity Ads, AppLovin, Liftoff)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Mobile apps · negative prompt · alternative

“AppLovin/Liftoff for programmatic game/in-app scale” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Mobile apps · comparative prompt · alternative

“AppLovin (good filtering performance)” Mistral Small · Programmatic · negative prompt · alternative

“For Gaming: AppLovin” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Mobile apps · comparative 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.

“What to Avoid on a Budget - Programmatic DSPs (AppLovin, IronSource, Unity Ads) - require $10K+/month minimum” Mistral Small · Mobile apps · budget prompt · hard negative

“Avoid complex Demand-Side Platforms (DSPs) like AppLovin or Liftoff, which require high spend ($15k+/month)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Mobile apps · budget prompt · hard negative

“Risk level: Very high - avoid unless you can conduct extensive independent verification” Mistral Small · Mobile apps · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid higher-volume platforms such as AppLovin and Liftoff on a very small budget” Perplexity Sonar · Mobile apps · budget prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as AppLovin, over the 28 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AppLovin was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Google App Campaigns18 of 286Not in the top three

AppsFlyer17 of 284Not in the top three

OneSignal16 of 282Not in the top three

Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns15 of 286Not in the top three

Adjust13 of 280Not in the top three

Apple Search Ads12 of 285Not in the top three

Branch12 of 281Not in the top three

Braze11 of 282Not in the top three

CleverTap11 of 280Not in the top three

Liftoff10 of 280Not 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 AppLovin. 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 28 answers that named AppLovin and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

insiderone.com4

adlibrary.com3

f6s.com3

gartner.com3

gitnux.org3

guideflow.com3

madgicx.com3

wifitalents.com3

apsteq.com2

businessofapps.com2

Twenty-nine of the twenty-nine domain citations in answers naming AppLovin came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

adlibrary.com/posts/best-mobile-advertising-apps3

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

gitnux.org/best/mobile-app-marketing-software3

guideflow.com/blog/best-mobile-marketing-software3

madgicx.com/blog/ad-tech-platform-for-mobile-apps3

wifitalents.com/best/mobile-app-marketing-software3

dash.app/blog/top-marketing-apps-small-business2

f6s.com/software/category/mobile-app-marketing2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as AppLovin

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

AppLovin (AppDiscovery) 2AppLovin MAX 1

The company

AppLovin.

Website: applovin.com
Headquarters: Palo Alto, United States
Founded: 2012
Ownership: Public, APP on Nasdaq

From Wikidata, fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase

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 AppLovin'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 AppLovin, 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 applovin.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.