Index › Products › IAS · October 2026 Edition

3 categories · Named, not ranked

IAS

14Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

8 / 14Models named it

3Categories

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. IAS was named 3 times in Click fraud protection and 2 other categories, where ClickCease led with 36%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market32 of 52

under the label threshold

Enterprise17 of 49

under the label threshold

In click fraud protection · 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 IAS 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
Click fraud protection	Marketing	0%	32 of 52	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by ClickCease at 36%
Mobile apps	Marketing	0%	68 of 117	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Customer.io at 17%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
Programmatic and display advertising	Marketing	0%	80 of 92	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by StackAdapt at 48%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for IAS yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated IAS across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.20	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative6 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative14 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Use fraud detection tools like TrafficGuard, IAS, or DoubleVerify” MiniMax M2.5 · Mobile apps · negative prompt · alternative

“Strong in brand suitability scoring” Kimi K2 · Click fraud protection · 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.

“even top-tier verification vendors failed to block brand-unsafe content on major, legitimate sites” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Programmatic · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as IAS, over the 14 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IAS was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

DoubleVerify14 of 140Not among the top eight

Lunio6 of 143Not among the top eight

TrafficGuard6 of 140Not among the top eight

Cheq5 of 142Not among the top eight

HUMAN Security5 of 141Not among the top eight

ClickCease3 of 141Not among the top eight

Anura3 of 140Not among the top eight

DataDome3 of 140Not among the top eight

Pixalate3 of 140Not among the top eight

AppsFlyer2 of 142Not among the top eight

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 IAS. 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 14 of the 14 answers that named IAS and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

lunio.ai8

guideflow.com7

improvado.io7

clickcease.com4

clickpatrol.com4

humansecurity.com4

trafficguard.ai4

clickfortify.com3

clickguardian.ai3

joindatacops.com3

No domain is on file for IAS, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

lunio.ai/blog/best-click-fraud-detection-tools-for-enterprise-advertisers6

guideflow.com/blog/best-click-fraud-software5

improvado.io/blog/best-ad-fraud-detection-software4

lunio.ai/blog/the-9-best-click-fraud-detection-tools-ranked4

clickpatrol.com/best-click-fraud-protection-software3

mailmodo.com/marketing-stash/click-fraud-software3

trafficguard.ai/blog/best-click-fraud-protection-software-protect-your-ppc-campaigns3

admanage.ai/blog/programmatic-advertising-platforms2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as IAS

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as IAS; a claim can dispute any of them.

IAS (Integral Ad Science) 1

Follow IAS

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.

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 IAS'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 IAS, 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 IAS by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where IAS 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 IAS, 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.