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 17 → 10 of 62
1 category · Named, not rankedCustomerscore.io
11Judge labels
3First choices
0Negative labels
6 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Customerscore.io was named 2 times in Customer success, where ChurnZero led with 42%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business11 of 64
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market8 of 49
2%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise4 of 35
4%3 labels
under the label threshold
In customer success · 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 Customerscore.io 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customer success platforms | Customer | 2% | 8 of 49 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by ChurnZero at 42% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Customerscore.io held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Customer success · by segment
Mid-market▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 15 → 8 of 46
EnterprisenewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 5% now.
5%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 4 of 33, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customer success | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 15 → 8 of 49 |
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 Customerscore.io 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 Customerscore.io 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative3 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained5 labels3
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative11 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 4 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.
“If you want automated product-use health scoring and playbooks on a tight budget, choose Customerscore.io.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Customer success · budget 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Customerscore.io, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Customerscore.io was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Customerscore.io, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Customerscore.io 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 Customerscore.io. 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 11 of the 11 answers that named Customerscore.io and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
customerscore.ioYour site9
userpilot.com8
clientsuccess.com6
zapier.com6
learn.g2.com5
reddit.com5
capterra.com4
g2.com4
skalin.io4
usepylon.com4
Forty-six of the fifty-five domain citations in answers naming Customerscore.io came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on customerscore.io
418
subdomains included
Content
186
counted in the table below
Documentation
41
Product · Integration
4 · 45
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-11 to 2026-10 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 126 | 84 | 2026-09-29 | ||
| Comparison | 18 | 6 | 2026-09-10 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 17 | 0 | 2025-07-30 | ||
| Report or ebook | 13 | undated | |||
| Case study | 9 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 3 | 1 | 2026-08-11 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-29Predictive playbooks saas blog
- 2026-09-28Adoption gap analysis blog
- 2026-09-27Data mapping for cs blog
- 2026-09-27Forecast net dollar retention blog
- 2026-09-25Early churn warning blog
- 2026-09-25Integrations prioritization cs blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page customerscore.io 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 October 5, 2026.
Follow Customerscore.io
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
Customerscore.io is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Customerscore.io is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- AI-native Customer Success platform for SaaS. Predictive, explainable health scoring, churn and expansion prediction, and automated playbooks.
- For
- For B2B SaaS teams that own revenue and want to be more efficient and proactive with every customer.
- Price stated
- one platform fee based on your ARR plus a one-time setup customerscore.io/pricing
- Integrations claimed
- 8 customerscore.io · 31 customerscore.io/integrations pages disagree
- Certifications
- ISO 27001GDPRGDPR compliant
- Hosting
- EUEU hostingEU-basedEU-hosted
- Customers named
- SmartsuppWhatspotHalcyon LabsBrightline HealthVantage FreightOakridge LegalPinecrest MediaFieldstone Software
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial
What Customerscore.io's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: customerscore.io, customerscore.io, customerscore.io/pricing, customerscore.io/solutions/revops, customerscore.io/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 Customerscore.io'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 Customerscore.io, 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 Customerscore.io by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Customerscore.io 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 Customerscore.io, 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.