GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › AspireIQ · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

AspireIQ

11Judge labels

1First choices

5Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

1Category

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

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. AspireIQ was named 3 times in Influencer, where Favikon led with 27%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business13 of 80

under the label threshold

Mid-market79 of 79

under the label threshold

Enterprise31 of 62

under the label threshold

In influencer · 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 AspireIQ 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
Influencer platforms	Marketing	0%	79 of 79	100%	3	under 10 labels · led by Favikon at 27%

Movement

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

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

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

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 label1

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative3 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative11 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“you likely don't have the dedicated engineering team or seven-figure budget required for enterprise-only tools like AspireIQ (now Aspire) that require $15k–$50k/month retainers” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Influencer · scale prompt · soft negative

“Enterprise platforms (AspireIQ, Klear, CreatorIQ) typically start at $2,000–$5,000+/month with annual contracts—likely overkill” Kimi K2 · Influencer · scale prompt · soft negative

“Instead of paying tens of thousands of dollars for enterprise consumer-facing platforms (like CreatorIQ, GRIN, or AspireIQ)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Influencer · direct prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as AspireIQ, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AspireIQ was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CreatorIQ9 of 112Not in the top three

GRIN9 of 111Not in the top three

Upfluence7 of 110Not in the top three

Klear6 of 110Not in the top three

HypeAuditor5 of 110Not in the top three

Traackr4 of 111Not in the top three

Influence.co4 of 110Not in the top three

Modash3 of 111Not in the top three

Afluencer2 of 110Not in the top three

Creator.co2 of 110Not 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.

Names read as AspireIQ

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

AspireIQ (now Aspire) 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 AspireIQ'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 AspireIQ, 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 aspire.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.