GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Grade.us · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Grade.us

22Judge labels

2First choices

3Negative labels

10 of 12Models named it

1Category

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

Standing

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Grade.us was named 8 times in Reviews, 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 business14 of 83

under the label threshold

Mid-market28 of 103

under the label threshold

Enterprise16 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 Grade.us 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%	28 of 103	0%	8	under 10 labels · led by Birdeye at 26%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	1
Kimi K2	2	1	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative10 labelsNone

Budget-constrained5 labels2

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative22 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.

“Simpler pricing, white-label options, no aggressive lock-in” Kimi K2 · Reviews · negative prompt · alternative

“Best white-label solution — full rebrandable platform” Kimi K2 · Reviews · comparative prompt · alternative

“Need white-label for clients? → Grade.us.” GPT-5.4 mini · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Grade.us, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Grade.us was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Birdeye20 of 228Not in the top three

Reputation16 of 222Not in the top three

Podium14 of 221Not in the top three

ReviewTrackers10 of 220Not in the top three

NiceJob8 of 221Not in the top three

BrightLocal8 of 220Not in the top three

SOCi8 of 220Not in the top three

Yext8 of 220Not in the top three

Trustpilot7 of 220Not in the top three

ReviewGrower6 of 221Not 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 Grade.us. 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 4 of the 22 answers that named Grade.us and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

appfollow.io3

birdeye.com2

feedbackrobot.com2

gartner.com2

guideflow.com2

ranked.solutions2

thecxlead.com2

usa.inquirer.net2

alchemer.com1

asknicely.com1

Nineteen of the nineteen domain citations in answers naming Grade.us came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

appfollow.io/blog/reputation-management-software3

feedbackrobot.com/articles/best-reputation-management-software2

gartner.com/reviews/market/online-reputation-management-software2

ranked.solutions/rankings/review-management-software2

thecxlead.com/tools/best-customer-review-management-software2

usa.inquirer.net/191823/best-reputation-management-software2

alchemer.com/resources/blog/the-best-review-management-software-how-to-take-control-of-you1

asknicely.com/blog/reputation-com-alternatives1

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Grade.us'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 Grade.us, 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 gradeus.ai 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.