GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › eesel.ai · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

eesel.ai

3Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

3 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. eesel.ai was named 2 times in Support chatbots, where Intercom led with 35%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business51 of 84

under the label threshold

Mid-market39 of 106

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In support chatbots · 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 eesel.ai 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
Chatbots and conversational AI for support	Customer	0%	39 of 106	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Intercom at 35%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for eesel.ai 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 eesel.ai across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0
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	1	1
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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 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.

“The cheapest paid AI for helpdesk at $0.40 per ticket with no monthly minimum” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Support chatbots · budget prompt · alternative

“For high ticket volumes: eesel.ai ($0.40/ticket)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Support chatbots · budget prompt · alternative

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 eesel.ai, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and eesel.ai was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Tidio3 of 32Not in the top three

Zoho Desk3 of 31Not in the top three

Chatling3 of 30Not in the top three

Freshdesk3 of 30Not in the top three

Botpress2 of 30Not in the top three

Chatbase2 of 30Not 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 eesel.ai. 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 1 of the 3 answers that named eesel.ai and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

askyura.com1

connect.lime-technologies.com1

eesel.aiYour site1

featurebase.app1

fin.ai1

proprofschat.com1

quidget.ai1

Six of the seven domain citations in answers naming eesel.ai came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

askyura.com/blog/which-ai-chatbot-is-best-for-small-businesses-on-a-budget1

connect.lime-technologies.com/en/blog/chatbot-providers1

eesel.ai/blog/cheapest-ai-apps-for-helpdesk1

featurebase.app/blog/ai-chatbot-platforms1

fin.ai/learn/best-ai-chatbots-customer-support1

proprofschat.com/blog/best-customer-service-chatbots1

quidget.ai/blog/ai-automation/10-affordable-ai-chatbot-platforms-for-small-businesses1

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 eesel.ai'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 eesel.ai, 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 eesel.ai 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.