Every category where a model named Chattermill 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
Customer intelligence and data science	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	35 of 158	0%	8	under 10 labels · led by Google Analytics 4 at 16%
Customer feedback and surveys	Customer	0%	37 of 104	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by Google Forms at 15%
Review and reputation management	Marketing	0%	47 of 103	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Birdeye at 26%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	1	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
Mistral Small	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	1
Kimi K2	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	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

Direct8 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative9 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative6 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative31 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.

“Enterpret / Chattermill — if your priority is unifying scattered feedback with advanced AI analysis” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Feedback · scale prompt · alternative

“Best for Deep Product Feedback & Analysis (Review Mining): Enterpret or Chattermill” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Reviews · direct prompt · alternative

“Chattermill unifies unstructured text from sources like Net Promoter Score (NPS) surveys” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Customer intel · comparative prompt · alternative

“Chattermill if your priority is analyzing customer feedback across channels” MiniMax M2.5 · Customer intel · 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 Chattermill, over the 31 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Chattermill was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Qualtrics23 of 316Not in the top three

Medallia21 of 312Not in the top three

SurveyMonkey15 of 311Not in the top three

Enterpret12 of 312Not in the top three

Mixpanel10 of 311Not in the top three

InMoment9 of 310Not in the top three

Typeform8 of 310Not in the top three

Amplitude7 of 310Not in the top three

Hotjar7 of 310Not in the top three

Thematic7 of 310Not 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 Chattermill. 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 8 of the 31 answers that named Chattermill and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

learn.g2.com5

enterpret.com4

getperspective.ai4

worldmetrics.org4

chattermill.comYour site3

deeto.com3

gartner.com3

gitnux.org3

greatquestion.co3

guideflow.com3

Thirty-two of the thirty-five domain citations in answers naming Chattermill came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

deeto.com/blog-post/customer-feedback-platforms-compared3

enterpret.com/guides/best-customer-feedback-analysis-tools-for-large-companies3

greatquestion.co/blog/customer-feedback-tools3

amplifai.com/blog/customer-insights-software2

blog.uxtweak.com/customer-analytics-software2

cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com/tools/best-customer-data-platforms/1276110752

customergauge.com/blog/client-feedback-tool2

customergauge.com/blog/voice-of-customer-tools2

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 Chattermill'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 Chattermill, 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 chattermill.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.