Every category where a model named Clearout 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
Email verification	GTM data and infrastructure	6%	4 of 53	3%	33	accepted challenger
CRM data quality and deduplication	Revenue operations	0%	19 of 104	0%	9	under 10 labels · led by Insycle at 34%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct16 labels3

Paraphrase20 labels2

Comparative30 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained11 labelsNone

Scale-constrained11 labelsNone

Negative13 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative101 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 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.

“The best email verification service for a mid-market B2B company is Hunter, Clearout, or Kickbox” Llama 4 Maverick · Email verification · direct prompt · first choice

“For most mid-market B2B companies, I'd recommend starting with Clearout” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Email verification · direct prompt · first choice

“would be Hunter, Clearout, or Zerobounce” Llama 4 Maverick · Email verification · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“if your primary concern is email deliverability and you're budget-constrained, Clearout offers excellent value” GLM 4.7 FlashX · CRM data quality · 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.

“Clearout: 94.1% real accuracy” Kimi K2 · Email verification · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Clearout, over the 101 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Clearout was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

ZeroBounce74 of 10120Not in the top three

Hunter60 of 10115Not in the top three

NeverBounce59 of 1015Not in the top three

Bouncer57 of 10123Not in the top three

Kickbox52 of 1014Not in the top three

Emailable44 of 1010Not in the top three

EmailListVerify30 of 1013Not in the top three

DeBounce27 of 1012Not in the top three

MillionVerifier20 of 1011Not in the top three

Insycle15 of 1019Not 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 Clearout. 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 12 of the 101 answers that named Clearout and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

mailtrap.io8

hunter.io7

cleanlist.ai6

usebouncer.com6

zerobounce.net6

clearout.ioYour site5

debounce.com5

emailvendorselection.com5

pipeline.zoominfo.com5

myemailverifier.com4

Fifty-two of the fifty-seven domain citations in answers naming Clearout came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

mailtrap.io/blog/email-verification-tools8

hunter.io/email-verification-guide/best-email-verifiers7

debounce.com/blog/email-verification-tools5

emailvendorselection.com/email-verification-tools5

zerobounce.net/5

overloop.com/blog/email-verification-guide4

pipeline.zoominfo.com/marketing/email-verification-tools4

clearout.io/email-verification-tools3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Clearout

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Clearout; a claim can dispute any of them.

Clearout.io 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 Clearout'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 Clearout, 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 clearout.io 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.