Every category where a model named Cloudingo 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
CRM data quality and deduplication	Revenue operations	2%	9 of 104	3%	31	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Cloudingo 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 Cloudingo 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	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	2	0	0	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	2	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	3	1	1	5
Mistral Small	0	1	2	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	3	0	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	4	1	0	5
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	2	0	0	3
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	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

Direct13 labelsNone

Paraphrase8 labelsNone

Comparative18 labels3not counted in share

Budget-constrained10 labels2

Scale-constrained14 labels2

Negative10 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative73 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 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.

“lighter, purpose-built tools like Cloudingo (Salesforce) ... provide safer, rule-based cleansing with better audit trails” Qwen 3.7 Flash · CRM data quality · negative prompt · first choice

“If you are strictly on Salesforce, tools like Cloudingo or DataGroomr are highly optimized for your ecosystem.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · CRM data quality · comparative prompt · first choice

“Cloudingo: Highly automated, Salesforce-native, excellent for real-time deduplication and custom merge rules.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · CRM data quality · scale prompt · first choice

“For Salesforce teams needing deduplication: DemandTools or Cloudingo” GLM 4.7 FlashX · CRM data quality · 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.

“Cloudingo and DemandTools can slow down on large datasets” Grok 4.1 Fast · CRM data quality · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Cloudingo, over the 73 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cloudingo was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Insycle61 of 7316Not in the top three

DemandTools59 of 7310Not in the top three

ZoomInfo Operations35 of 733Not in the top three

Informatica24 of 732Not in the top three

Cleanlist23 of 735Not in the top three

Dedupely23 of 732Not in the top three

Openprise22 of 731Not in the top three

Apollo.io20 of 732Not in the top three

DataGroomr20 of 730Not in the top three

ZoomInfo16 of 730Not 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 Cloudingo. 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 9 of the 73 answers that named Cloudingo and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cleanlist.ai6

g2.com6

cognism.com5

integrate.io5

default.com4

findymail.com4

syncmatters.com4

clearout.io3

morsoftware.com3

ovaledge.com3

Forty-three of the forty-three domain citations in answers naming Cloudingo came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cleanlist.ai/blog/2026-03-27-data-quality-tools6

cognism.com/blog/data-quality-software5

g2.com/categories/data-quality/f/crm5

integrate.io/blog/top-10-data-cleansing-tools5

default.com/post/crm-data-enrichment4

findymail.com/blog/crm-data-quality4

cleanlist.ai/blog/2026-05-12-best-database-cleaning-software3

clearout.io/blog/crm-data-cleaning-solutions3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Cloudingo

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

Cloudingo/Insycle 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 Cloudingo'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 Cloudingo, 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 cloudingo.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.