GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Facebook · September 2026 Edition

3 categories · Named, not ranked

Facebook

10Judge labels

0First choices

10Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

3Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Facebook was named 4 times in Video hosting and 2 other categories, where Wistia led with 56%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business40 of 48

under the label threshold

Mid-market52 of 56

under the label threshold

Enterprise44 of 48

under the label threshold

In video hosting · 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 Facebook 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
Video marketing and hosting	Marketing	0%	52 of 56	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by Wistia at 56%
Content marketing platforms	Marketing	0%	116 of 159	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 30%
Identity resolution	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	136 of 151	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Hightouch at 15%

Movement

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

Model	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	2
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-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative10 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“Google, Facebook, X and similar massive platforms - Why avoid: Rated as critical risk "data aggregators"” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Identity · negative prompt · hard negative

“You should generally avoid embedding social media feeds on your website for marketing campaigns.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Video hosting · negative prompt · hard negative

“Social-first approach - not designed for business website embeds” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Video hosting · negative prompt · hard negative

“Better for organic sharing, but vet promoted content aggressively and use strict targeting.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Content marketing · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Facebook, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Facebook was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

YouTube8 of 100Not in the top three

Wistia7 of 102Not in the top three

Vimeo7 of 101Not in the top three

TikTok7 of 100Not in the top three

Vidyard7 of 100Not in the top three

Brightcove6 of 100Not in the top three

Gumlet6 of 100Not in the top three

Instagram6 of 100Not in the top three

Google Drive5 of 100Not in the top three

Dailymotion4 of 100Not 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.

Names read as Facebook

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Facebook; a claim can dispute any of them.

Facebook/Instagram (Meta platforms) 1

The company

Facebook.

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'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, 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.