GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Captiv8 · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Captiv8

13Judge labels

0First choices

5Negative labels

8 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.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Captiv8 was named 3 times in Influencer, where Favikon led with 27%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business61 of 80

under the label threshold

Mid-market71 of 79

under the label threshold

Enterprise15 of 62

under the label threshold

In influencer · 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 Captiv8 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
Influencer platforms	Marketing	0%	71 of 79	67%	3	under 10 labels · led by Favikon at 27%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Captiv8 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 Captiv8 across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative13 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

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.

“Better value than enterprise tools like CreatorIQ or Captiv8” Mistral Small · Influencer · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

“Opaque pricing; mixed support reviews” Kimi K2 · Influencer · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Captiv8, over the 13 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Captiv8 was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CreatorIQ13 of 137Not in the top three

Traackr11 of 132Not in the top three

GRIN10 of 132Not in the top three

Upfluence9 of 130Not in the top three

Aspire7 of 130Not in the top three

Modash5 of 131Not in the top three

Klear5 of 130Not in the top three

Afluencer3 of 130Not in the top three

HypeAuditor3 of 130Not in the top three

Meltwater3 of 130Not 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 Captiv8. 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 3 of the 13 answers that named Captiv8 and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

aspire.io2

guideflow.com2

modash.io2

toolradar.com2

afluencer.com1

archive.com1

blog.hootsuite.com1

brandchamp.io1

creatoriq.com1

devopsschool.com1

Fourteen of the fourteen domain citations in answers naming Captiv8 came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/influencer-marketing-platforms2

toolradar.com/guides/best-influencer-marketing-platforms2

afluencer.com/blog/best-influencer-marketing-platforms1

archive.com/blog/best-influencer-marketing-platforms-enterprise-teams1

aspire.io/1

aspire.io/blog/pros-and-cons-influencer-marketplace1

aspire.io/strategy/influencer-marketing1

blog.hootsuite.com/influencer-marketing-tools1

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Captiv8'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 Captiv8, 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 captiv8.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.