Every category where a model named GaggleAMP 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	Since September 2026
Employee advocacy platforms	Marketing	4%	5 of 64	7%	28	accepted challenger
Loyalty, advocacy and referrals	Marketing	0%	78 of 110	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Smile.io at 26%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for GaggleAMP yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated GaggleAMP across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	2	0	0	3
GPT-5.4 mini	0	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	4	0	0	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.20	0	0	1	1	2
Mistral Small	0	1	1	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	2	1	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	1	1	0	0	2
Muse Glimmer 30B	1	2	1	0	4

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

Direct19 labels2

Paraphrase16 labels1

Comparative23 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained18 labels6

Scale-constrained9 labelsNone

Negative19 labels3not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative104 labels in all, every segment counted; 9 of the 13 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.

“GaggleAMP is best for maximizing participation and specific engagement actions like comments, follows, and reviews” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Employee advocacy · comparative prompt · first choice

“Choose GaggleAMP if you want a coordinator-driven, structured sharing program with strong mid-market adoption” Muse Glimmer 30B · Employee advocacy · direct prompt · first choice

“My default pick would be GaggleAMP for a typical mid-market B2B company” GPT-6 Luna · Employee advocacy · direct prompt · first choice

“Works best when one coordinator runs a structured program for a mid-market B2B company focused on LinkedIn amplification” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Employee advocacy · 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.

“Known limitations: - Primarily built around gamification/leaderboards” Kimi K2 · Employee advocacy · negative prompt · soft negative

“Custom quotes from Sprinklr, GaggleAMP, or Sociuu can balloon for SMBs.” Grok 4.20 · Employee advocacy · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as GaggleAMP, over the 104 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GaggleAMP was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

EveryoneSocial80 of 10426Compare →

DSMN865 of 10418Compare →

Sociabble50 of 1042Not among the top eight

Hootsuite Amplify48 of 1041Not among the top eight

Oktopost42 of 10410Compare →

Clearview Social26 of 1046Not among the top eight

PostBeyond25 of 1041Compare →

Haiilo25 of 1040Not among the top eight

Vulse19 of 1044Not among the top eight

Taplio18 of 1044Compare →

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 GaggleAMP. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 102 of the 104 answers that named GaggleAMP and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

guideflow.com58

blog.hootsuite.com54

supergrow.ai51

g2.com49

dsmn8.com42

learn.g2.com39

heysid.com37

postbeam.ai35

magicpost.in34

taplio.com34

433 of the 433 domain citations in answers naming GaggleAMP came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/best-employee-advocacy-software-tools54

blog.hootsuite.com/employee-advocacy-tools52

supergrow.ai/blog/employee-advocacy-tools48

learn.g2.com/best-employee-advocacy-software39

heysid.com/resources/best-employee-advocacy-software-and-tools-for-b2b37

postbeam.ai/blog/best-employee-advocacy-tools34

taplio.com/blog/employee-advocacy-tools34

dsmn8.com/blog/how-to-choose-the-best-employee-advocacy-platform33

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

gaggleamp.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, GaggleAMP takes 4% of first choices and DSMN8 takes 21%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “employee advocacy platform”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “best employee advocacy platform”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 480 a month (“gaggleamp”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 0 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 2,583 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 1,710 · 7 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 1,770
Paid Google search: No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

4 ads · 4 text · 3 shown in the last 30 days

First shown April 2026, as GaggleAMP, verified. Ads started 2025-11 to 2026-10: 4 in the year.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 5 of 64 in employee advocacy

Segment leader

21%

DSMN8

First choices: 9 across its categories
Named in: 104 answers
Its own site cited: in 102 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on gaggleamp.com

569

subdomains included

Content

393

counted in the table below

Documentation

139

Product · Integration

0 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Blog	336	5	2026-09-24	Employee advocacy, SEO
Case study	24	undated		Employee advocacy
Glossary or explainer	13	0	2026-04-23
Comparison	7	undated
Template or tool	7	undated
Report or ebook	6	undated

Most recent

2026-09-24How to choose the right employee advocacy platform blog
2026-09-23Get sales team coordinated on social blog
2026-09-16The complete guide to scaling employee advocacy blog
2026-07-21Employee advocacy platforms vs. social media tools whats the difference blog
2026-07-13How do you roll out an employee advocacy platform in 90 days blog
2026-07-03Why is my companys linkedin reach dropping in 2026 blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page gaggleamp.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read October 5, 2026.

Names read as GaggleAMP

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

GaggleAmp 1

Follow GaggleAMP

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

The company

GaggleAMP is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: The First Employee Advocacy Platform
gaggleamp.com
For: B2B brands
gaggleamp.com
Price stated: Your Custom Price gaggleamp.com/pricing
Free plan or trial: Book your free demo gaggleamp.com
Integrations claimed: 2 gaggleamp.com
Certifications: G2 LeaderEmployee Advocacy Leader Fall 2026High PerformerUsers Love Us
Customers named: Colonial LifeWGroupSmartBugContrast SecurityMagna5
Not stated on the pages read: Starting price, hosting

What GaggleAMP's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: gaggleamp.com, gaggleamp.com/pricing, gaggleamp.com/integrations. A claimed page can correct any of 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 GaggleAMP'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 GaggleAMP, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for GaggleAMP by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where GaggleAMP is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name GaggleAMP, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.