Every category where a model named Facebook Groups 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
Community platforms	Customer	2%	7 of 74	27%	11	criticized challenger

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	1	1
Kimi K2	0	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	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-constrained17 labels3

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative15 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative32 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 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.

“Start with Facebook Groups or Discord to test community interest and engagement before investing in a paid platform.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Community · budget prompt · first choice

“free or near-free option like Discord or Facebook Groups ... weaker for branding, customer support workflows” GPT-5.4 mini · Community · budget prompt · alternative

“Completely free and familiar to most users... though moderation can be more challenging.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Community · budget prompt · alternative

“Start with a free Discord or Facebook Group to validate demand” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Community · 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.

“AVOID for Business Communities... never build a business-critical community here.” Kimi K2 · Community · negative prompt · hard negative

“they come with platform lock-in, limited control over the experience, and weak ownership of member data” Perplexity Sonar · Community · negative prompt · soft negative

“Limitations: No data ownership, limited branding, poor monetization, algorithm-dependent” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Community · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Facebook Groups, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Facebook Groups was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Circle30 of 325Not in the top three

Discord26 of 324Not in the top three

Mighty Networks22 of 321Not in the top three

Bettermode20 of 327Not in the top three

Discourse17 of 326Not in the top three

Slack16 of 320Not in the top three

Skool13 of 321Not in the top three

Higher Logic Vanilla10 of 320Not in the top three

Salesforce Experience Cloud8 of 320Not in the top three

Gainsight Customer Communities7 of 320Not 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 Facebook Groups. 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 7 of the 32 answers that named Facebook Groups and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

bettermode.com5

cxtoday.com5

gartner.com5

higherlogic.com5

circle.so4

feverbee.com4

guideflow.com4

linodash.com4

standingongiants.com4

zendikt.com4

Forty-four of the forty-four domain citations in answers naming Facebook Groups came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cxtoday.com/community-social-engagement/customer-community-platforms-20265

gartner.com/reviews/market/b2b-customer-community-platforms5

bettermode.com/blog/all-in-one-community-platform4

circle.so/blog/best-community-platforms4

feverbee.com/platformcosts4

guideflow.com/blog/customer-community-software4

linodash.com/community-platforms4

standingongiants.com/blog/community-platform-comparison-10-leading-platforms-reviewed-20264

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

The company

Facebook is the company behind Facebook Groups.

Website: facebook.com
Headquarters: Colombia
Founded: 2004
Employees: about 77,986 (2026)

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

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 Facebook Groups'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 Facebook Groups, 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 facebook.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.