GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › GoHighLevel · September 2026 Edition

4 categories · Named, not ranked

GoHighLevel

31Judge labels

3First choices

10Negative labels

9 of 12Models named it

4Categories

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

Standing

7 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. GoHighLevel was named 7 times in Reviews and 3 other categories, where Birdeye led with 26%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business65 of 83

under the label threshold

Mid-market67 of 103

under the label threshold

Enterprise87 of 89

under the label threshold

In reviews · 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 GoHighLevel 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
Review and reputation management	Marketing	0%	67 of 103	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by Birdeye at 26%
Marketing automation and campaign management	Marketing	0%	38 of 53	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Marketing Hub at 55%
CRM	Revenue operations	0%	61 of 71	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot CRM at 41%
Sales enablement and content	Sales	0%	67 of 81	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Dock at 19%

Movement

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

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase4 labels1

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained12 labels2

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative12 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative31 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.

“Best For: Marketing agencies and SaaS white-labelers.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Reviews · comparative 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.

“users report high frustration with reliability and transparency” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Marketing automation · negative prompt · hard negative

“52/100 (Caution) | Steep learning curve, marketing agency platform issues” MiniMax M2.5 · CRM · negative prompt · soft negative

“Review gating is actively promoted by its community.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Reviews · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as GoHighLevel, over the 31 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GoHighLevel was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

HubSpot Marketing Hub10 of 315Not in the top three

Birdeye7 of 311Not in the top three

Podium7 of 310Not in the top three

Reputation7 of 310Not in the top three

Salesforce Marketing Cloud7 of 310Not in the top three

Brevo6 of 312Not in the top three

ActiveCampaign5 of 312Not in the top three

NiceJob5 of 311Not in the top three

Adobe Marketo Engage5 of 310Not in the top three

BrightLocal5 of 310Not 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 GoHighLevel

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

GoHighLevel (HighLevel) 1

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 GoHighLevel'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 GoHighLevel, 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 gohighlevel.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.