GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Cello · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Cello

29Judge labels

6First choices

1Negative labels

11 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

9 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Cello was named 9 times in Referrals and 1 other category, where PartnerStack led with 19%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business12 of 78

under the label threshold

Mid-market7 of 107

under the label threshold

Enterprise12 of 75

under the label threshold

In referrals · 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 Cello 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
Referral and partner programs	Partner and channel	4%	7 of 107	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by PartnerStack at 19%
Loyalty, advocacy and referrals	Marketing	0%	44 of 124	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Smile.io at 24%

Movement

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

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

Direct10 labels5

Paraphrase6 labels1

Comparative7 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative1 label1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative29 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 8 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.

“For most mid-market B2B SaaS companies today, Cello offers the best balance of automation, compliance, and cost-efficiency.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Referrals · direct prompt · first choice

“Server-side attribution, native fraud detection, Merchant of Record handling” Kimi K2 · Referrals · negative prompt · first choice

“Cello is positioned as the best B2B referral software for SaaS in 2026” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Referrals · direct prompt · first choice

“Ideal if product-led; less for sales-heavy B2B.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Loyalty · paraphrase 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 Cello, over the 29 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cello was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Referral Rock14 of 294Not in the top three

Referral Factory13 of 294Not in the top three

Friendbuy13 of 290Not in the top three

PartnerStack12 of 292Not in the top three

ReferralCandy11 of 293Not in the top three

GrowSurf11 of 291Not in the top three

Extole10 of 291Not in the top three

Viral Loops8 of 292Not in the top three

Ambassador8 of 291Not in the top three

FirstPromoter8 of 291Not 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 Cello. 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 4 of the 29 answers that named Cello and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cello.soYour site4

openloyalty.io4

customergauge.com3

extole.com3

affise.com2

blog.nextbee.com2

gitnux.org2

influencermarketinghub.com2

introw.io2

klaviyo.com2

Twenty-two of the twenty-six domain citations in answers naming Cello came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

openloyalty.io/insider/best-referral-software4

customergauge.com/blog/b2b-referral-software3

extole.com/blog/retail-referral-software3

affise.com/blog/referral-software2

blog.nextbee.com/2026/03/02/best-referral-software-for-b2b-companies-a-strategic-growth-gu2

cello.so/7-best-b2b-referral-software-2026-guide2

cello.so/blog/best-referral-software-saas-native-integrations2

influencermarketinghub.com/social-media-posting-scheduling-tools/top-referral-marketing-so2

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 Cello'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 Cello, 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 cello.so 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.