Small business▼−4Since September 2026: 4% → 0%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 6 → 7 of 39
Contentsquare · 5 categories · RankedHeap
225Judge labels
3First choices
61Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
5Categories
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
3% in Product analytics for mid-market buyers
Rank 5 of 40 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 24% of its 51 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Heap →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business7 of 41
0%38 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market5 of 40
3%51 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise14 of 53
0%40 labels
criticized challenger
In product analytics · 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 Heap 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product analytics | GTM data and infrastructure | 3% | 5 of 40 | 24% | 51 | accepted challenger | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Customer intelligence and data science | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 24 of 142 | 28% | 18 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Web analytics | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 19 of 91 | 12% | 16 | accepted challenger | |
| Session replay and heatmaps | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 24 of 56 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Clarity at 33% | |
| Tag management | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 40 of 67 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Google Tag Manager at 81% | goneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Heap held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Product analytics · by segment
Mid-market▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 11 → 5 of 38
Enterprise▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 4 → 14 of 48
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product analytics | 0% | 4% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 11 → 5 of 40 |
| Customer intel | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 73 → 24 of 142 |
| Web analytics | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 19 of 91, unchanged |
| Session replay | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 24 of 56, unchanged |
| Tag management | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 21 → 40 of 67 |
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 Heap 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 Heap 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 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 10 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 10 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 10 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 8 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 7 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 9 |
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
Direct34 labels2
Paraphrase21 labels1
Comparative62 labelsNone
Budget-constrained23 labelsNone
Scale-constrained40 labelsNone
Negative45 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative225 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 4 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.
“Heap - works best for mid-market B2B SaaS teams and non-technical product managers who need fast time-to-insight without engineering overhead.” Llama 4 Maverick · Product analytics · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Heap is ideal for mid-market B2B SaaS teams and non-technical product managers who need fast time-to-insight” Llama 4 Maverick · Product analytics · direct prompt · first choice
“if you are under pressure to show immediate results and lack engineering resources, Heap will win you the most internal friends.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Product analytics · direct prompt · alternative
“This autocapture approach makes it one of the most user-friendly tools for product, UX, and growth teams that want insights fast.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Product analytics · 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.
“Avoid Heap for now — While powerful, it costs $2,000-5,000/month and is designed for enterprise budgets” Kimi K2 · Customer intel · budget prompt · hard negative
“Post-acquisition decline... Heap and Mixpanel have the most documented customer pain points” Kimi K2 · Product analytics · negative prompt · hard negative
“Heap (now by Contentsquare) – Be highly cautious” Grok 4.1 Fast · Product analytics · negative prompt · hard negative
“Less control over what data is collected, no native experimentation capability, and weaker data governance compared to Amplitude or Mixpanel.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Customer intel · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Heap, over the 225 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Heap was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Heap, over the 225 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Heap 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 Heap. 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 198 of the 225 answers that named Heap and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
amplitude.com128
linkedin.com72
userpilot.com71
mixpanel.com67
posthog.com60
checkthat.ai56
g2.com53
guideflow.com53
productschool.com52
gainsight.com51
663 of the 663 domain citations in answers naming Heap came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
heap.io ranks 7 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Heap takes 3% of first choices and Amplitude Analytics takes 34%.ShowHide
Search and answers
heap.io ranks 7 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Heap takes 3% of first choices and Amplitude Analytics takes 34%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “product analytics platform”
7
Position for “best product analytics platform”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 40,500 a month (“heap”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 11,454 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 16,541 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 1,241 · 109 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 7,051
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
3%
rank 5 of 40 in product analytics
Segment leader
34%
Amplitude Analytics
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 225 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 198 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on heap.io
829
subdomains included
Content
518
counted in the table below
Documentation
70
Product · Integration
35 · 4
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 318 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 66 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 65 | undated | |||
| News or press | 24 | undated | |||
| Case study | 17 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 13 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 9 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 3 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 2 | undated | |||
| Conference or event | 1 | undated |
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page heap.io 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. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Heap
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Heap; a claim can dispute any of them.
Heap (now by Contentsquare) 1
Follow Heap
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
Contentsquare is the company behind Heap.ShowHide
The company
Contentsquare is the company behind Heap.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- contentsquare.com
- Headquarters
- Paris, France
- Founded
- 2008
- Also from Contentsquare
- Contentsquare
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Heap by Contentsquare is the only digital insights platform that shows everything users do on your site, revealing the "unknown unknowns" that stay invisible with other tools.
- For
- Product teams
- Price stated
- Free; Custom Session Pricing heap.io/pricing
- Starting price
- Free heap.io/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Free Trial heap.io
- Integrations claimed
- 100 heap.io
- Certifications
- SOC-2 CertifiedGDPR CompliantCCPA CompliantISO 27001277012701727018
- Customers named
- FreshworksHuelLending ClubEsuranceRedfinKlaviyoXandr
- Not stated on the pages read
- Hosting
What Heap's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: heap.io, heap.io/pricing, heap.io/platform/security, heap.io/use-case/saas, heap.io/customer-stories. 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 Heap'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 Heap, 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 Heap by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Heap 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 Heap, 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.