Mid-marketnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 24 of 61, unchanged
1 category · Named, not rankedBounceCheck
2Judge labels
1First choices
0Negative labels
2 / 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
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. BounceCheck was named 2 times in Email verification, where ZeroBounce led with 42%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market12 of 65
2%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In email verification · 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 BounceCheck 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Email verification | GTM data and infrastructure | 2% | 12 of 65 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by ZeroBounce at 42% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, BounceCheck held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Email verification · by segment
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Email verification | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 12 of 65, 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 BounceCheck 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 BounceCheck 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 0 | 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
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained2 labels1
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.
“Cheapest at 10K+ verifications: BounceCheck and DeBounce tie at $20/10K one-time” Muse Glimmer 30B · Email verification · budget prompt · first choice
“BounceCheck (Best for Monthly Subscription Needs)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Email verification · 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 BounceCheck, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and BounceCheck was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as BounceCheck, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and BounceCheck 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 BounceCheck. 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 2 of the 2 answers that named BounceCheck and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
bouncecheck.emailYour site2
kickbox.com2
oppora.ai2
accio.com1
billionverify.com1
blog.gamalogic.com1
emaillistverify.com1
geekextreme.com1
geekflare.com1
lemlist.com1
Eleven of the thirteen domain citations in answers naming BounceCheck came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
bouncecheck.email ranks 8 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, BounceCheck takes 2% of first choices and ZeroBounce takes 42%.ShowHide
Search and answers
bouncecheck.email ranks 8 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, BounceCheck takes 2% of first choices and ZeroBounce takes 42%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “email verification service”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best email verification service”
8
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 12 of 65 in email verification
Segment leader
42%
ZeroBounce
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 2 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 2 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 bouncecheck.email
25,651
subdomains included
Content
25,625
counted in the table below
Documentation
12
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-11 to 2026-10 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Template or tool | 25,393 | undated | SEO, CRM | ||
| Blog | 155 | 100 | 2026-10-05 | Email verification, SEO | |
| Comparison | 41 | 34 | 2026-10-02 | Email verification | |
| Glossary or explainer | 14 | 13 | 2026-10-05 | ||
| Conference or event | 12 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 7 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 2 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 1 | 1 | 2026-09-30 |
Most recent
- 2026-10-05What is a transient email error glossary or explainer
- 2026-10-05Smtp authentication error blog
- 2026-10-02Hard bounce vs soft bounce comparison
- 2026-10-02554 5 7 1 relay access denied blog
- 2026-10-02Queued email meaning blog
- 2026-10-02Email bounce code 550 blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page bouncecheck.email 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. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read October 5, 2026.
Follow BounceCheck
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
BounceCheck is its own company.ShowHide
The company
BounceCheck is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Real-time email verification service
- For
- Cold email and newsletter senders
- Price stated
- Yes bouncecheck.email
- Starting price
- 0 bouncecheck.email
- Free plan or trial
- Free to try; the Free plan includes 50 verifications per month with no credit card required bouncecheck.email
- Integrations claimed
- 5000 bouncecheck.email/integrations
- Certifications
- GDPRCCPASOC 2 compliantGDPR / HIPAASOC 2 Type IIISO 27001HIPAAGDPR Aligned
- Customers named
- FlowdeskCampaignlyKonnect Agency
- Not stated on the pages read
- Hosting
What BounceCheck's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: bouncecheck.email, bouncecheck.email/pricing, bouncecheck.email/security, bouncecheck.email/integrations. 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 BounceCheck'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 BounceCheck, 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 BounceCheck by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where BounceCheck 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 BounceCheck, 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.