Every category where a model named Contentsquare 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
Session replay and heatmaps	GTM data and infrastructure	3%	7 of 56	14%	21	accepted challenger
Product analytics	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	35 of 40	44%	9	under 10 labels · led by Amplitude Analytics at 34%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Customer intelligence and data science	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	22 of 142	0%	8	under 10 labels · led by Amplitude at 18%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Web analytics	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	25 of 91	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by Google Analytics 4 at 57%
Audience and consumer insights platforms	Marketing	0%	54 of 155	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by SparkToro at 19%
Experimentation and personalization	Marketing	0%	25 of 71	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by VWO at 27%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Contentsquare yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Contentsquare 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	0	1	1	2
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	1	1	3
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	1	2	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	3	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	2	1	5
Mistral Small	0	3	3	0	6
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	2	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	2	0	4
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	2	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	1	4	0	7
MiniMax M2.5	0	2	1	0	3
GPT-6 Luna	0	3	0	0	3
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	2	1	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

Direct24 labels5

Paraphrase19 labels6

Comparative59 labels7not counted in share

Budget-constrained18 labelsNone

Scale-constrained17 labels2

Negative32 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative169 labels in all, every segment counted; 13 of the 22 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.

“my default recommendation is Contentsquare if you want the most complete, scalable experience-analytics platform” GPT-5.4 mini · Session replay · direct prompt · first choice

“Go with FullStory or Contentsquare for deep session replay and journey analytics.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Session replay · comparative prompt · first choice

“Contentsquare - Auto-capture analytics, better for non-technical teams” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Product analytics · negative prompt · first choice

“The sweet spot is usually FullStory, Contentsquare, or LogRocket” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Session replay · scale 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.

“Be wary of their "bundled" offerings—integration is not as smooth as marketed.” Kimi K2 · Product analytics · negative prompt · hard negative

“Heavy enterprise pricing and complexity; overkill for most mid-market needs” Kimi K2 · Session replay · direct prompt · hard negative

“enterprise tools only if you need deeper product analytics, governance, or enterprise workflows, because they're generally much more expensive” GPT-5.4 mini · Session replay · budget prompt · soft negative

“without paying the $50k+ annual contract values required by enterprise-only suites (like FullStory or Contentsquare)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Session replay · direct prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Contentsquare, over the 169 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Contentsquare was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Fullstory110 of 16918Compare →

Hotjar70 of 1699Compare →

Mixpanel67 of 1698Not among the top eight

PostHog62 of 1698Compare →

Microsoft Clarity60 of 16924Compare →

LogRocket58 of 1690Compare →

Glassbox53 of 1698Not among the top eight

Quantum Metric49 of 1694Not among the top eight

Amplitude47 of 16910Not among the top eight

Heap41 of 1690Not among the top eight

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 Contentsquare. 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 168 of the 169 answers that named Contentsquare and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

contentsquare.comYour site80

quantummetric.com71

amplitude.com62

learn.g2.com59

g2.com50

fullstory.com47

userpilot.com41

guideflow.com38

pendo.io38

statsig.com33

439 of the 519 domain citations in answers naming Contentsquare came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

quantummetric.com/blog/top-8-session-replay-tools-for-enterprises38

quantummetric.com/blog/best-session-replay-tools-in-202636

learn.g2.com/best-session-replay-software30

zapier.com/blog/best-session-replay-tools29

koji.so/blog/best-session-replay-tools-202626

pendo.io/pendo-blog/the-top-6-session-replay-tools25

contentsquare.com/guides/session-replay/tools23

mouseflow.com/blog/best-session-replay-and-heatmap-tools23

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

contentsquare.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Contentsquare takes 3% of first choices and Microsoft Clarity takes 33%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “session replay and heatmap tool”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “best session replay and heatmap tool”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 2,900 a month (“contentsquare”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 101 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 149,925 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 17,931 · 918 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 52,453
Paid Google search: No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

119+ ads · 82 text, 37 video · 86 shown in the last 30 days

First shown November 2024, as CONTENT SQUARE, verified. Ads started 2025-10 to 2026-09: 90 in the year, 29 before. 1 more by other advertisers linking to it.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 7 of 56 in session replay

Segment leader

33%

Microsoft Clarity

First choices: 13 across its categories
Named in: 169 answers
Its own site cited: in 168 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

Addresses on contentsquare.com

2,114

subdomains included

Content

1,332

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

52 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Report or ebook	710	undated		Mobile apps, Product analytics
Blog	298	0	2025-01-20	Product analytics, CRM
Case study	159	undated
News or press	87	undated		Product analytics
Comparison	61	undated
Glossary or explainer	9	undated
Podcast or video	5	undated
Template or tool	3	undated

Most recent

2025-01-20Feedback actionable blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page contentsquare.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. Read September 29, 2026.

Names read as Contentsquare

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

ContentSquare 3Contentsquare (full suite) 1

Follow Contentsquare

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

Contentsquare.

ShowHide

On record

Wikidata

Website: contentsquare.com
Headquarters: Paris, France
Founded: 2008
Also from Contentsquare: Heap

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

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: all-in-one experience intelligence platform
contentsquare.com
For: enterprise and mid-market brands
contentsquare.com
Price stated: Free $0; Growth $49$39; Pro Let's talk; Enterprise Let's talk contentsquare.com/pricing
Starting price: 0 contentsquare.com/pricing
Free plan or trial: Start for free contentsquare.com
Integrations claimed: 100 contentsquare.com · 115 contentsquare.com/pricing pages disagree
Certifications: SOC 2 Type 2 ReportISO 27001ISO 27017ISO 27018ISO 27701SOC 2 Type IIISO 9001:2015ISO/IEC 27001
Customers named: AudiSpecsaversPirelliEasyjetJohn LewisHanesOcadoAdmiral
Not stated on the pages read: Hosting

What Contentsquare's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: contentsquare.com, contentsquare.com/pricing, trust.contentsquare.com, contentsquare.com/platform, contentsquare.com/customers. 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 Contentsquare'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 Contentsquare, 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 Contentsquare by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Contentsquare 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 Contentsquare, 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.