GTM AI Index
Index Vendors › Bunny Stream · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

Bunny Stream

22Judge labels
1First choices
4Negative labels
9 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.
Best standing
0% in Video hosting for small business buyers
Rank 8 of 56 in the mid-market standing
0 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 8 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In video hosting · 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 Bunny Stream 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Video marketing and hostingMarketing0%8 of 560%8under 10 labels · led by Wistia at 56%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Bunny Stream 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 Bunny Stream across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash02002
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast01001
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash00202
Llama 4 Maverick01001
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00101
MiniMax M2.501001

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
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained13 labels1
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative6 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative22 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.

“Consider pay-as-you-go developer tools like Bunny Stream or Mux, which cost pennies per gigabyte” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Video hosting · negative prompt · alternative
“Ultra-cheap technical setup | Requires dev work | Lowest cost for low traffic; fast CDN.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Video hosting · budget prompt · alternative
“a pay-as-you-go video delivery network that is absurdly cheap” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Video hosting · budget prompt · alternative
“| Bunny Stream | Cost-efficient delivery | Usage-based |” MiniMax M2.5 · Video hosting · direct 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 Bunny Stream, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Bunny Stream was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Wistia22 of 228Not in the top three
Vimeo22 of 221Not in the top three
YouTube19 of 227Not in the top three
SmartVideo12 of 222Not in the top three
SproutVideo11 of 220Not in the top three
Vidyard10 of 220Not in the top three
Brightcove8 of 221Not in the top three
Gumlet7 of 221Not in the top three
Dailymotion5 of 220Not in the top three
Kaltura5 of 220Not 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.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Bunny Stream. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 1 of the 22 answers that named Bunny Stream and are not a share of its labels.

Names read as Bunny Stream

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Bunny Stream; a claim can dispute any of them.
Bunny Stream (by Bunny.net) 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 Bunny Stream'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 Bunny Stream, 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 bunnystream.com 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.

Subscribe to the pack