GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Comarch · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Comarch

8Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

5 of 12Models named it

1Category

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

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Comarch was named 1 time in Loyalty, where Smile.io led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business80 of 119

under the label threshold

Mid-market82 of 124

under the label threshold

Enterprise36 of 114

under the label threshold

In loyalty · 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 Comarch 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
Loyalty, advocacy and referrals	Marketing	0%	82 of 124	0%	1	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 Comarch 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 Comarch across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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 Comarch, over the 8 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Comarch was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Antavo7 of 81Not in the top three

Open Loyalty7 of 81Not in the top three

Annex Cloud5 of 82Not in the top three

Extole5 of 82Not in the top three

Talon.One5 of 82Not in the top three

Yotpo5 of 81Not in the top three

LoyaltyLion5 of 80Not in the top three

Ambassador4 of 81Not in the top three

Salesforce Loyalty Management4 of 81Not in the top three

Capillary4 of 80Not 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 Comarch. 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 3 of the 8 answers that named Comarch and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

openloyalty.io3

whitelabel-loyalty.com3

raftlabs.com2

smile.io2

voucherify.io2

99minds.io1

aboutmartech.com1

blog.stamped.io1

blog.usetada.com1

bonusqr.com1

Seventeen of the seventeen domain citations in answers naming Comarch came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

openloyalty.io/insider/best-loyalty-software-comparison-guide3

whitelabel-loyalty.com/blog/loyalty/best-loyalty-program-software-providers-ranked-and-rev3

openloyalty.io/insider/best-loyalty-management-software2

raftlabs.com/blog/top-customer-loyalty-software2

smile.io/learn/best-enterprise-loyalty-platforms-for-ecommerce2

99minds.io/blog/loyalty-program-apps1

aboutmartech.com/blog/best-customer-loyalty-platforms1

blog.stamped.io/stamped-blog/blog/comparing-loyalty-program-platforms-who-does-it-best-2021

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

The company

Comarch.

Website: comarch.com
Headquarters: Kraków, Poland

From Wikidata, fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase

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 Comarch'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 Comarch, 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 comarch.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.