Every category where a model named HypeAuditor 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
Influencer platforms	Marketing	0%	19 of 79	12%	24	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labelsNone

Comparative16 labelsNone

Budget-constrained8 labelsNone

Scale-constrained8 labelsNone

Negative11 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative47 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.

“HypeAuditor — Best-in-class for fraud detection and audience authenticity” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Influencer · negative prompt · first choice

“a specialist vetting tool (HypeAuditor/Modash) for fraud/audience checks before signing” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Influencer · scale prompt · alternative

“Need to vet influencers for authenticity | HypeAuditor's free tools” Kimi K2 · Influencer · budget prompt · alternative

“HypeAuditor — strong on audience analysis and authenticity vetting” MiniMax M2.5 · Influencer · scale 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.

“Good for fraud detection, but can be excessive if you only need a simple, inexpensive creator database.” Perplexity Sonar · Influencer · negative prompt · soft negative

“Free Testing, Expensive Scaling ... need significant budget for full features” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Influencer · budget prompt · soft negative

“Less B2B-focused; no LinkedIn depth” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Influencer · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as HypeAuditor, over the 47 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HypeAuditor was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

GRIN30 of 476Not in the top three

Modash30 of 475Not in the top three

Afluencer28 of 478Not in the top three

CreatorIQ28 of 477Not in the top three

Upfluence27 of 473Not in the top three

Aspire23 of 472Not in the top three

Shopify Collabs23 of 472Not in the top three

Influencity16 of 470Not in the top three

Collabstr15 of 472Not in the top three

Heepsy15 of 472Not 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 HypeAuditor. 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 6 of the 47 answers that named HypeAuditor and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

influee.co5

learn.g2.com5

guideflow.com4

sproutsocial.com4

amourvert.com3

influencermarketinghub.com3

toolradar.com3

afluencer.com2

archive.com2

blog.hypeauditor.comYour site2

Thirty-one of the thirty-three domain citations in answers naming HypeAuditor came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/influencer-marketing-platforms4

influee.co/blog/influencer-marketing-platforms4

learn.g2.com/free-influencer-marketing-platforms4

sproutsocial.com/insights/influencer-marketing-platforms4

amourvert.com/articles/best-influencer-marketing-platforms-for-small-businesses-and-startu3

influencermarketinghub.com/top-influencer-marketing-platforms3

toolradar.com/guides/best-influencer-marketing-platforms3

afluencer.com/blog/best-influencer-marketing-platforms2

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 HypeAuditor'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 HypeAuditor, 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 hypeauditor.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.