GTM AI Index

Index › Products › BidSparq · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

BidSparq

13Judge labels

1First choices

0Negative labels

5 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, 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. BidSparq was named 3 times in RFP response, where Loopio led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business12 of 68

under the label threshold

Mid-market28 of 82

under the label threshold

Enterprise20 of 54

under the label threshold

In rfp response · 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 BidSparq 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
RFP response software	Sales	0%	28 of 82	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Loopio at 25%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for BidSparq yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated BidSparq across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	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 labels1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative4 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative13 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.

“BidSparq is the best low-cost tool. It is not strictly "response" software” GLM 4.7 FlashX · RFP response · budget prompt · alternative

“or BidSparq if you're focused on government contracts” Kimi K2 · RFP response · budget 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as BidSparq, over the 13 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and BidSparq was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Loopio8 of 131Not among the top eight

DeepRFP6 of 134Not among the top eight

PandaDoc6 of 132Not among the top eight

Responsive5 of 130Not among the top eight

PowerRFP4 of 132Not among the top eight

Arphie4 of 131Not among the top eight

Upland Qvidian4 of 130Not among the top eight

AutoRFP.ai3 of 130Not among the top eight

Inventive AI3 of 130Not among the top eight

SAM.gov3 of 130Not among the top eight

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 BidSparq. 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 13 of the 13 answers that named BidSparq and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

bidsparq.comYour site13

responsive.io11

inventive.ai10

g2.com9

deeprfp.com8

sifthub.io8

sourceforge.net7

capterra.com6

guideflow.com5

wifitalents.com5

Sixty-nine of the eighty-two domain citations in answers naming BidSparq came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

bidsparq.com/blog/rfp-management-software13

deeprfp.com/7

inventive.ai/blog-posts/top-rfp-software-small-businesses-startups7

sifthub.io/blog/rfp-software-for-small-business7

bidsparq.com/rfp-software6

g2.com/categories/rfp/f/rfp-response6

inventive.ai/blog-posts/best-rfp-software6

guideflow.com/blog/rfp-software5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on bidsparq.com

2,398

subdomains included

Content

338

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

0 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest
Glossary or explainer	108	3	2026-09-08
Blog	104	57	2026-09-28
Comparison	69	24	2026-07-11
Report or ebook	52	1	2026-08-24
Template or tool	5	undated

Most recent

2026-09-28Higher gov pricing guide blog
2026-09-25Fpds manual searches what youre missing blog
2026-09-24Recompete ai win the rebid before it posts blog
2026-09-23Nte stands for blog
2026-09-22Rfp aggregator guide blog
2026-09-21Fpi contract guide blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page bidsparq.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.

Follow BidSparq

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.

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 BidSparq'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 BidSparq, 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 BidSparq by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where BidSparq 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 BidSparq, 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.