Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 44 → 39 of 45
11 categories · RankedCognism
402Judge labels
12First choices
60Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
11Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
10% in Sales intel for enterprise buyers
Rank 5 of 50 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 6% of its 48 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Cognism →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business46 of 49
0%32 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market5 of 50
2%48 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise5 of 53
2%55 labels
accepted challenger
In enrichment · 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 Cognism 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data enrichment | GTM data and infrastructure | 2% | 5 of 50 | 6% | 48 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Sales intelligence and contact data | Sales | 2% | 5 of 52 | 13% | 52 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| B2B intent data providers | Sales | 0% | 12 of 60 | 9% | 22 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| CRM data quality and deduplication | Revenue operations | 0% | 19 of 99 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Insycle at 43% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Market intelligence platforms | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 30 of 172 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Apollo.io at 17% | |
| Account-based marketing platforms | Marketing | 0% | 29 of 71 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by AdRoll ABM at 53% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Audience and consumer insights platforms | Marketing | 0% | 43 of 155 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by SparkToro at 19% | |
| Customer data platforms | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 47 of 61 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Segment at 49% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Customer intelligence and data science | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 88 of 142 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Amplitude at 18% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Field sales tools | Sales | 0% | 35 of 94 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Badger Maps at 38% | |
| Value selling tools | Sales | 0% | 75 of 116 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Minoa at 21% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Cognism held within the floor in all eleven categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Enrichment · by segment
Mid-market▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 4 → 5 of 48
Enterprise▼−10Since September 2026: 12% → 2%, −10 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 12% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 1 pointRank 2 → 5 of 46
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intent data | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 12 of 60 |
| Enrichment | 4% | 2% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 5 of 50 |
| Sales intel | 2% | 2% | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 5 of 52 |
| CRM data quality | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 21 → 19 of 99 |
| Market intelligence | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 30 of 172, unchanged |
| ABM | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 44 → 29 of 71 |
| Audience insights | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 43 of 155, unchanged |
| CDP | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 47 of 61, unchanged |
| Customer intel | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 88 of 142, unchanged |
| Field sales | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 35 of 94, unchanged |
| Value selling | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 75 of 116, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Cognism across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Cognism across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 9 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 7 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 16 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 7 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 16 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 8 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 14 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 10 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 8 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 15 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 12 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 6 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 9 |
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
Direct89 labelsNone
Paraphrase71 labels6
Comparative89 labels4not counted in share
Budget-constrained37 labels4
Scale-constrained47 labels2
Negative69 labels15not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative402 labels in all, every segment counted; 12 of the 31 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.
“Cognism is particularly known for GDPR/CCPA compliance-first design and Diamond Data phone verification, making it a strong candidate if European markets are a priority.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Sales intel · scale prompt · first choice
“use European compliance-first data providers like Cognism or Dropcontact, which strictly adhere to GDPR” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Enrichment · negative prompt · first choice
“Cognism: Highly rated for EMEA/UK mobile data (GDPR-compliant, human-verified "Diamond Data")” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Sales intel · negative prompt · first choice
“Cognism | GDPR/CCPA certified, human-verified mobile numbers” Kimi K2 · Enrichment · negative 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.
“and Cognism (expensive, EU-focused) if budget is your primary constraint” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Sales intel · budget prompt · hard negative
“often Cognism — both are generally positioned as enterprise tools” GPT-5.4 mini · Enrichment · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid ZoomInfo and Cognism for now” Kimi K2 · Sales intel · budget prompt · hard negative
“Many platforms (Cognism, SalesIntel, some smaller tools) layer Bombora or ZoomInfo intent data into their product. You may already be paying for the same signals twice” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Intent data · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Cognism, over the 402 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cognism was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Cognism, over the 402 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cognism was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 Cognism. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 384 of the 402 answers that named Cognism and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
pipeline.zoominfo.com235
demandbase.com152
cognism.comYour site137
salesmotion.io129
apollo.io121
amplemarket.com103
cleanlist.ai92
lusha.com91
g2.com83
prospeo.io70
1,076 of the 1,213 domain citations in answers naming Cognism came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
cognism.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Cognism takes 2% of first choices and Apollo.io takes 73%.ShowHide
Search and answers
cognism.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Cognism takes 2% of first choices and Apollo.io takes 73%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “b2b data enrichment tool”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best b2b data enrichment tool”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 3,600 a month (“cognism”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 68 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 48,685 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 8,901 · 657 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 6,591
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 10 clicks and $0 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 5 of 50 in enrichment
Segment leader
73%
Apollo.io
- First choices
- 12 across its categories
- Named in
- 402 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 384 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on cognism.com
1,113
subdomains included
Content
582
counted in the table below
Documentation
2
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 403 | 10 | 2026-09-23 | ||
| Case study | 56 | undated | |||
| News or press | 43 | 2 | 2026-09-16 | ||
| Comparison | 41 | 0 | 2025-10-16 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 16 | 1 | 2026-09-21 | ||
| Report or ebook | 11 | 0 | 2023-11-28 | ||
| Podcast or video | 7 | 0 | 2025-11-19 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 3 | 0 | 2026-04-24 | ||
| Template or tool | 2 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-23Mcp server defined blog
- 2026-09-22Choose mcp software gtm blog
- 2026-09-21What is mcp in ai glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-17Ai confidently wrong about your market blog
- 2026-09-16B2b data api blog
- 2026-09-16Ukas accredited iso 27001 and 27701 certification news or press
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page cognism.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Follow Cognism
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Cognism is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Cognism is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- leader in premium sales intelligence
- For
- Enterprise and mid-market sales, marketing and revenue operations teams working in B2B markets. Teams with at least 5 salespeople often see the most value, especially those prospecting into Europe.
- Price stated
- Cognism pricing is based on your business needs. Cognism costs do differ depending on the package you choose, but we have no hidden cost associated with access to the platform, keeping your outgoings predictable. cognism.com
- Free plan or trial
- Free data sample cognism.com
- Certifications
- ISO 27001SOC2GDPRCCPA
- Customers named
- MollieDinMoZick LearnBearingPointAVEVAOpenpriseSparta GlobalSaleCycle
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations, hosting
What Cognism's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: cognism.com, cognism.com/pricing, trust.cognism.com, cognism.com/case-studies, cognism.com/integrations. A claimed page can correct any of 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 Cognism'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 Cognism, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Cognism by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Cognism is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Cognism, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.