GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › eesier · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

eesier

6Judge labels

4First choices

0Negative labels

4 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. eesier was named 2 times in AI SDR, where Apollo.io led with 20%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business6 of 79

under the label threshold

Mid-market9 of 71

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In ai sdr · 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 eesier 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
AI SDR agents	Sales	4%	9 of 71	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Apollo.io at 20%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1
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	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels4

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative6 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 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 a 100% autonomous agent for under $150: Go with eesier (for zero-setup outbound)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · AI SDR · budget prompt · first choice

“start with eesier or SalesTools.io - both offer the best value for small companies” MiniMax M2.5 · AI SDR · 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 eesier, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and eesier was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

AiSDR4 of 60Not in the top three

Apollo.io3 of 61Not in the top three

11x2 of 60Not in the top three

Agent Frank2 of 60Not in the top three

Artisan2 of 60Not in the top three

Clay2 of 60Not in the top three

Instantly2 of 60Not in the top three

SalesTools.io2 of 60Not in the top three

Salesforge Agent Frank1 of 61Not in the top three

Amplemarket Duo1 of 60Not 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 eesier. 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 6 answers that named eesier and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

11x.ai1

amplemarket.com1

close.com1

devcommx.com1

eesier.comYour site1

fundraiseinsider.com1

g2.com1

layer3labs.io1

pipeline.zoominfo.com1

salesforge.ai1

Nine of the ten domain citations in answers naming eesier came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

11x.ai/guides/ai-sdr-agents-b2b-sales-teams1

11x.ai/guides/ai-sdr-tools-b2b-sales-teams1

amplemarket.com/blog/best-ai-sales-agents1

close.com/blog/ai-sdr-sales-agent-tools-compared1

devcommx.com/blogs/best-ai-sdr-agencies1

devcommx.com/blogs/best-ai-sdr-platforms1

eesier.com/best-ai-sdr-small-business1

fundraiseinsider.com/blog/ai-sdr-tools1

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 eesier'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 eesier, 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 eesier.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.