Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 133 → 128 of 130
2 categories · RankedAppLovin
19Judge labels
0First choices
9Negative labels
9 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in Mobile apps for mid-market buyers
Rank 106 of 117 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 40% of its 10 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of AppLovin →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business137 of 138
0%6 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market106 of 117
0%10 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise37 of 76
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
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 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile apps | Marketing | 0% | 106 of 117 | 40% | 10 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Video advertising | Marketing | 0% | 56 of 114 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by StackAdapt at 32% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, AppLovin held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Mobile apps · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 127 → 74 of 105
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 30 → 35 of 69
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile apps | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 127 → 106 of 117 |
| Video ads | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 56 of 114, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated AppLovin across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated AppLovin across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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
Comparative9 labelsNone
Budget-constrained4 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative4 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative19 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.
“Integrated user acquisition + monetization stack; high eCPMs for gaming verticals. (Minimum ~$10K/month spend.)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Mobile apps · comparative prompt · alternative
“layer in programmatic DSPs like AppLovin or Moloco” 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.
“Frequently criticized for "attribution scams and privacy violations"” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Mobile apps · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid programmatic DSPs like AppLovin and Liftoff below $15k/month” Muse Glimmer 30B · Mobile apps · budget prompt · hard negative
“avoid heavyweight programmatic DSPs like AppLovin and Liftoff until you have much more volume” Perplexity Sonar · Mobile apps · budget prompt · soft negative
“Complaints about poor targeting, fraud risks, or suboptimal ROAS in UA campaigns” Grok 4.20 · Mobile apps · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AppLovin, over the 19 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.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AppLovin, over the 19 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.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 19 of the 19 answers that named AppLovin and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
adlibrary.com11
g2.com11
learn.g2.com10
mobileappdaily.com10
apsteq.com9
f6s.com6
guideflow.com6
madgicx.com6
appsflyer.com5
businessofapps.com5
Seventy-nine of the seventy-nine domain citations in answers naming AppLovin came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
applovin.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, AppLovin takes 0% of first choices and Customer.io takes 17%.ShowHide
Search and answers
applovin.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, AppLovin takes 0% of first choices and Customer.io takes 17%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “mobile app marketing platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best mobile app marketing platform”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 33,100 a month (“applovin”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 1,096 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 29,280 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 419 · 133 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 15,123
- Paid Google search
- 32 searches its ads show for, about 267 clicks and $10,675 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 106 of 117 in mobile apps
Segment leader
17%
Customer.io
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 19 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 19 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on applovin.com
1,775
subdomains included
Content
45
counted in the table below
Documentation
310
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 32 | 1 | 2026-09-16 | ||
| Report or ebook | 8 | undated | |||
| Case study | 3 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-16Catch bad ads not data blog
- 2026-06-22Applovin ads now open blog
- 2026-06-16Measurement lens blog
- 2026-05-11Earnings q1 2026 blog
- 2026-04-30Silos performance blog
- 2026-03-20Generating video blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page applovin.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read September 29, 2026.
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) 1AppLovin / Unity Ads 1
Follow AppLovin
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
AppLovin.ShowHide
The company
AppLovin.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- applovin.com
- Headquarters
- Palo Alto, United States
- Founded
- 2012
- Ownership
- Public, APP on Nasdaq
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Advertising solutions built for growth
- For
- consumer brands and gaming apps
- Certifications
- ISO27001
- Hosting
- USA
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, customers
What AppLovin's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: applovin.com, trust.applovin.com. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for AppLovin by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where AppLovin is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name AppLovin, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.