GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Higher Logic · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Higher Logic

28Judge labels

0First choices

7Negative labels

12 of 12Models named it

2Categories

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. Higher Logic was named 7 times in Loyalty and 1 other category, where Smile.io led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business76 of 119

under the label threshold

Mid-market32 of 124

under the label threshold

Enterprise21 of 114

under the label threshold

In loyalty · 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 Higher Logic 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
Loyalty, advocacy and referrals	Marketing	0%	32 of 124	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by Smile.io at 24%
Community platforms	Customer	0%	40 of 74	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Higher Logic Vanilla at 23%

Movement

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

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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase5 labelsNone

Comparative12 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative28 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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 Higher Logic, over the 28 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Higher Logic was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Influitive16 of 285Not in the top three

Extole13 of 283Not in the top three

Khoros10 of 282Not in the top three

Ambassador10 of 280Not in the top three

SlapFive10 of 280Not in the top three

Friendbuy9 of 280Not in the top three

Mention Me9 of 280Not in the top three

Open Loyalty9 of 280Not in the top three

Circle8 of 282Not in the top three

Discourse8 of 281Not 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 Higher Logic. 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 3 of the 28 answers that named Higher Logic and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cxtoday.com2

gartner.com2

guideflow.com2

standingongiants.com2

appexchange.salesforce.com1

bettermode.com1

buddyboss.com1

cdn2.hubspot.net1

circle.so1

disciple.community1

Fourteen of the fourteen domain citations in answers naming Higher Logic came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cxtoday.com/community-social-engagement/customer-community-platforms-20262

gartner.com/reviews/market/b2b-customer-community-platforms2

guideflow.com/blog/customer-community-software2

standingongiants.com/blog/community-platform-comparison-10-leading-platforms-reviewed-20262

appexchange.salesforce.com/partners/servlet/servlet.FileDownload1

bettermode.com/blog/10-common-mistakes-to-avoid-when-building-online-communities1

bettermode.com/blog/all-in-one-community-platform1

buddyboss.com/blog/the-best-community-management-softwares1

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 Higher Logic'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 Higher Logic, 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 higherlogic.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.