AWeber

Named in 3 judge labels across 2 categories by 2 of 6 models in the September 2026 Edition. 0 first choices, 3 negative labels. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-08.5.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. AWeber was named 3 times in Email marketing and 1 other category, where HubSpot Marketing Hub led with 67%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

Standing by category

Every category where a model named AWeber. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Vertical	First choices	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Email marketing platforms conflict disclosed	Marketing	0%	35 of 36	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Marketing Hub at 67%
Marketing automation and campaign management conflict disclosed	Marketing	0%	15 of 23	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Marketing Hub at 64%

By model

How each model treated AWeber across every prompt where it was named. Six models, six prompts per category.

Model	Negative	Labels
Claude Opus 5	0	0
Claude Opus 4.8	0	0
GPT-6 Astra	0	0
GPT-5.6 Sol	0	0
Gemini 3.1 Pro	1	1
Perplexity Sonar Pro	2	2

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.

“Verdict: Avoid if you prioritize cutting-edge design, intuitive automation builders” Gemini 3.1 Pro · Email marketing · negative prompt · hard negative

“Also appears in the same "avoid" bucket in some comparisons” Perplexity Sonar Pro · Email marketing · negative prompt · hard negative

“fine for newsletters and simple drips, but are inadequate for serious B2B marketing automation” Perplexity Sonar Pro · Marketing automation · negative prompt · soft negative

Names read as AWeber

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

Every label used the canonical name.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

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

It does not get any change to labels, shares or quadrants, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. Sponsorship is separate: a sponsor funds categories or buyer dimensions and is named on what it funded, and the rules are the same for every sponsor.