Every category where a model named Enterpret 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
Customer feedback and surveys	Customer	2%	16 of 104	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by Google Forms at 15%
Customer intelligence and data science	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	37 of 158	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by Google Analytics 4 at 16%
Review and reputation management	Marketing	0%	48 of 103	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Birdeye at 26%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	1	3
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	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

Direct8 labels1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained11 labelsNone

Negative2 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative24 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 3 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.

“shifting away from Qualtrics/Medallia for *unstructured* data toward newer platforms like Enterpret, Chattermill, or Thematic” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Customer intel · negative prompt · first choice

“Enterpret is the better pick if you need stronger feedback analysis across many sources” Perplexity Sonar · Feedback · direct prompt · first choice

“Enterpret / Chattermill — if your priority is unifying scattered feedback with advanced AI analysis” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Feedback · scale prompt · alternative

“Best for Deep Product Feedback & Analysis (Review Mining): Enterpret or Chattermill” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Reviews · direct 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 Enterpret, over the 24 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Enterpret was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Medallia16 of 240Not in the top three

Qualtrics15 of 243Not in the top three

Chattermill12 of 240Not in the top three

SurveyMonkey8 of 241Not in the top three

Alchemer6 of 241Not in the top three

CustomerGauge5 of 243Not in the top three

Amplitude5 of 241Not in the top three

Segment5 of 241Not in the top three

InMoment5 of 240Not in the top three

Mixpanel5 of 240Not 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 Enterpret. 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 4 of the 24 answers that named Enterpret and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

blog.buildbetter.ai3

customergauge.com3

deeto.com3

getperspective.ai3

zonkafeedback.com3

alchemer.com2

enterpret.comYour site2

front.com2

greatquestion.co2

surveysensum.com2

Twenty-three of the twenty-five domain citations in answers naming Enterpret came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

customergauge.com/blog/client-feedback-tool3

deeto.com/blog-post/customer-feedback-platforms-compared3

getperspective.ai/blog/best-b2b-customer-feedback-tools-20263

getperspective.ai/blog/best-b2b-customer-feedback-tools-2026-10-platforms-ranked3

alchemer.com/platform/customer-feedback2

blog.buildbetter.ai/best-customer-feedback-tools-rated-on-g2-and-gartner2

customergauge.com/blog/voice-of-customer-tools2

enterpret.com/guides/best-customer-feedback-analysis-tools-for-large-companies2

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 Enterpret'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 Enterpret, 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 enterpret.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.