GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Intellifluence · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Intellifluence

10Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

4 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

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Intellifluence was named 3 times in Influencer, where Favikon led with 27%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business21 of 80

under the label threshold

Mid-market28 of 79

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In influencer · 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 Intellifluence 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%	28 of 79	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Favikon at 27%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Intellifluence 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 Intellifluence 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	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0
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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 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.

“Intellifluence — good for simple, budget-friendly collaborations; has a free plan” GPT-5.4 mini · Influencer · budget prompt · alternative

“Affordable with free plans and transparent per-use pricing” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Influencer · negative 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 Intellifluence, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Intellifluence was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Modash9 of 102Not in the top three

Ainfluencer8 of 105Not in the top three

GRIN8 of 100Not in the top three

Heepsy7 of 100Not in the top three

Afluencer6 of 101Not in the top three

Upfluence6 of 101Not in the top three

Aspire5 of 100Not in the top three

Collabstr4 of 102Not in the top three

CreatorIQ4 of 100Not in the top three

Influencity4 of 100Not 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 Intellifluence. 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 1 of the 10 answers that named Intellifluence and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

influencermarketinghub.com1

upfluence.com1

Two of the two domain citations in answers naming Intellifluence came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

influencermarketinghub.com/influencer-apps1

influencermarketinghub.com/micro-influencer-platform1

upfluence.com/influencer-marketing/best-influencer-marketing-tools1

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 Intellifluence'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 Intellifluence, 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 intellifluence.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.