Small business▲+4Since September 2026: 4% → 8%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
8%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 5 → 2 of 130
Google · 1 category · RankedGoogle App Campaigns
33Judge labels
9First choices
2Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
8% in Mobile apps for small business buyers
Rank 5 of 117 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 5% of its 19 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Google App Campaigns →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business2 of 138
8%14 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market5 of 117
7%19 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In mobile apps · 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 Google App Campaigns 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile apps | Marketing | 7% | 5 of 117 | 5% | 19 | accepted challenger | ▼−3Since September 2026: 9% → 6%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Google App Campaigns held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Mobile apps · by segment
Mid-market▼−3Since September 2026: 9% → 6%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
6%from 9% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 5 of 105, unchanged
EnterprisegoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsNot ranked
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile apps | 9% | 6% | ▼−3Since September 2026: 9% → 6%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 5 of 117, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Google App Campaigns across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Google App Campaigns 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 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 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
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative8 labels4not counted in share
Budget-constrained14 labels9
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative10 labels4not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative33 labels in all, every segment counted; 9 of the 17 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.
“The best mobile app marketing platforms for a company with a limited budget are Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns and Google App Campaigns.” Llama 4 Maverick · Mobile apps · budget prompt · first choice
“Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns and Google App Campaigns are the best mobile advertising apps for constrained budgets.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Mobile apps · budget prompt · first choice
“Stick with well-established, transparent platforms like: Google App Campaigns (with Google's fraud protections)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Mobile apps · negative prompt · first choice
“the best mobile app marketing platforms are Meta Advantage+ App Campaigns and Google App Campaigns” Mistral Small · Mobile apps · budget prompt · first choice
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 can spend a significant portion of your budget displaying your ads in free mobile games... Be sure to aggressively utilize negative placement exclusions.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Mobile apps · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Google App Campaigns, over the 33 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google App Campaigns was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Google App Campaigns, over the 33 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google App Campaigns was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 Google App Campaigns. 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 33 of the 33 answers that named Google App Campaigns and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
adlibrary.com23
g2.com20
learn.g2.com17
mobileappdaily.com16
apsteq.com13
business.yelp.com11
businessofapps.com11
guideflow.com9
f6s.com8
appsflyer.com7
135 of the 135 domain citations in answers naming Google App Campaigns came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Google App Campaigns stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Google App Campaigns stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 170 a month (“google app campaigns”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 19 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on Google's site (google.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
7%
rank 5 of 117 in mobile apps
Segment leader
17%
Customer.io
- First choices
- 9 across its categories
- Named in
- 33 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 33 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 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.
Names read as Google App Campaigns
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Google App Campaigns; a claim can dispute any of them.
Google App Campaigns (UAC) 5Google App Campaigns (GAC) 1Google App campaigns 1Google UAC 1
Follow Google App Campaigns
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
Google is the company behind Google App Campaigns.ShowHide
The company
Google is the company behind Google App Campaigns.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- google.com
- Headquarters
- Mountain View, California, United States
- Founded
- 1998
- Ownership
- Part of Alphabet Inc.
- Also from Google
- Adometry, Attribution 360, BigQuery, Firebase, Google ADH, Google Ad Manager, Google AdMob, Google AdSense and 81 more
Fetched September 14, 2026, with a correction applied. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Customers named
- Teach for Japan
- Not stated on the pages read
- Positioning, who it is for, price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Google App Campaigns's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: google.com/nonprofits/offerings/google-ad-grants, google.com/intl/ar/nonprofits/offerings/google-ad-grants, google.com/intl/bg/nonprofits/offerings/google-ad-grants, google.com/intl/bs/nonprofits/offerings/google-ad-grants, google.com/intl/cs/nonprofits/offerings/google-ad-grants. 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 Google App Campaigns'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 Google App Campaigns, 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 Google App Campaigns by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Google App Campaigns 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 Google App Campaigns, 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.