Small business▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 67 → 14 of 59
4 categories · RankedBynder
237Judge labels
35First choices
70Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
4Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
48% in DAM for enterprise buyers
Rank 3 of 70 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
4 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 18% of its 55 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Bynder →By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
Small business14 of 67
2%40 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market3 of 70
15%55 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise1 of 56
48%66 labels
endorsed leader
In dam · 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 Bynder 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Digital asset management | Marketing | 15% | 3 of 70 | 18% | 55 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 15% → 15%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Creative automation platforms | Marketing | 4% | 10 of 109 | 10% | 10 | accepted challenger | |
| Marketing resource management | Marketing | 0% | 34 of 110 | 40% | 10 | criticized challenger | |
| Content marketing platforms | Marketing | 0% | 89 of 135 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 33% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Bynder held within the floor in all four categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · DAM · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 15% → 15%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
15%from 15% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 3 of 63, unchanged
Enterprise▲+16Since September 2026: 33% → 49%, +16 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.
49%from 33% in September 2026
Cleared the floor by 5 pointsRank 1 of 52, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creative automation | 0% | 4% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 4% now. | New this edition | Rank 10 of 109, unchanged |
| DAM | 15% | 15% | =heldSince September 2026: 15% → 15%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 of 70, unchanged |
| Marketing resource mgt | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 34 of 110, unchanged |
| Content marketing | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 54 → 89 of 135 |
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 Bynder 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 Bynder 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 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 7 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 8 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 13 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 7 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 6 |
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
Direct40 labels17
Paraphrase33 labels14
Comparative59 labels13not counted in share
Budget-constrained35 labels2
Scale-constrained37 labels2
Negative33 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative237 labels in all, every segment counted; 35 of the 48 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.
“Bynder suits mid-market organizations that prioritize brand portal distribution, clean UX, and fast deployment without significant IT involvement.” Muse Glimmer 30B · DAM · direct prompt · first choice
“Often considered the best all-around enterprise choice when usability, permissions, integrations, and brand governance matter together.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DAM · comparative prompt · first choice
“Bynder is often cited as a leader because it bridges the gap between a simple DAM and a full Creative Operations platform.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · DAM · comparative prompt · first choice
“Considered a top choice for organizations needing balance between usability and enterprise features” MiniMax M2.5 · DAM · comparative prompt · first choice
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.
“Avoid pricier ones like Canto or Bynder unless scaling up.” Grok 4.20 · DAM · budget prompt · hard negative
“If you need true creative automation, this may disappoint.” Kimi K2 · Creative automation · negative prompt · hard negative
“Clunky interfaces, slow uploads, or sluggish performance with large files/bulk edits (noted in Bynder and NetX reviews)... Overly expensive for small teams (e.g., Bynder complaints on cost)” Grok 4.20 · DAM · negative prompt · soft negative
“their core engine is a DAM (like Bynder or Brandfolder)... they historically lack the robust financial management, time-tracking, and resource scheduling capabilities” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Marketing resource mgt · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Bynder, over the 237 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Bynder was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Bynder, over the 237 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Bynder 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 Bynder. 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 217 of the 237 answers that named Bynder and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com94
canto.com81
zapier.com75
templafy.com66
cloudinary.com63
vntana.com60
air.inc58
learn.g2.com54
aprimo.com53
getmasset.com52
656 of the 656 domain citations in answers naming Bynder came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
bynder.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Bynder takes 15% of first choices and Canto takes 45%.ShowHide
Search and answers
bynder.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Bynder takes 15% of first choices and Canto takes 45%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “digital asset management system”
5
Position for “best digital asset management system”
7
- Searches for its name, Google
- 6,600 a month (“bynder”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 136 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 94,929 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 8,187 · 1,015 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 11,152
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
15%
rank 3 of 70 in DAM
Segment leader
45%
Canto
- First choices
- 35 across its categories
- Named in
- 237 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 217 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 bynder.com
3,495
subdomains included
Content
1,059
counted in the table below
Documentation
303
Product · Integration
48 · 3
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 410 | 5 | 2026-09-25 | DAM, SEO | |
| Glossary or explainer | 144 | 1 | 2026-07-20 | DAM, SEO | |
| News or press | 123 | 2 | 2026-07-28 | DAM | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 109 | 2 | 2026-09-03 | DAM | |
| Report or ebook | 93 | 4 | 2026-09-22 | DAM | |
| Case study | 86 | 2 | 2026-09-28 | DAM | |
| Podcast or video | 43 | 0 | 2026-05-20 | DAM, Direct mail | |
| Comparison | 32 | 1 | 2026-08-27 | DAM | |
| Conference or event | 18 | 8 | 2026-09-18 | DAM | |
| Template or tool | 1 | 0 | 2024-12-11 | DAM |
Most recent
- 2026-09-28The jackson laboratory case study
- 2026-09-25Empco directive green claims blog
- 2026-09-24How to guide to similarity search blog
- 2026-09-24Meet bynder mcp blog
- 2026-09-22The roi of ai agents in dam blog
- 2026-09-22The roi of ai agents report or ebook
Events in person
Last twelve months
- September 30, 2026MACH XAmsterdam · attended
- September 29, 2026MACH XAmsterdam · attended
- August 5, 2026 to August 6, 2026CMO AssemblyFour Seasons, Nashville · exhibited
- November 18, 2025 to November 19, 2025OnDAM Paris 2025Paris · hosted
As the event pages on bynder.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page bynder.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. 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 September 29, 2026.
Names read as Bynder
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Bynder; a claim can dispute any of them.
Bynder (Studio) 1
Follow Bynder
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
Bynder.ShowHide
The company
Bynder.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- bynder.com
- Headquarters
- Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Founded
- 2013
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The most intuitive enterprise DAM platform
- For
- global organizations
- Price stated
- Get pricing info bynder.com
- Integrations claimed
- 160 bynder.com
- Certifications
- MACH Alliance memberISO 27001:2022ISO 27018:2019ISO 22301:2019SOC 2 Type IIGDPRCCPAHIPAA
- Customers named
- Five GuysAdventHealthRaymour & FlaniganLacosteMolson CoorsCampari GroupMazdaSpecsavers
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial, hosting
What Bynder's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: bynder.com, bynder.com/en/pricing, trust.bynder.com, bynder.com/en/products, bynder.com/en/customers. 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 Bynder'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 Bynder, 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 Bynder by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Bynder 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 Bynder, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Bynder is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Bynder is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideBynder is among the products AI models recommend first in Digital asset management this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.