Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 105 → 103 of 108
1 category · RankedIpsos MMA
22Judge labels
0First choices
5Negative labels
10 / 14Models named it
1Category
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
0% in Attribution & MMM for enterprise buyers
Rank 39 of 123 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 25% of its 8 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business107 of 112
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market39 of 123
0%8 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise23 of 110
0%12 labels
accepted challenger
In attribution & mmm · 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 Ipsos MMA 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attribution and marketing mix modeling | Marketing | 0% | 39 of 123 | 25% | 8 | under 10 labels · led by Dreamdata at 27% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Ipsos MMA held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Attribution & MMM · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 59 → 34 of 112
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 37 → 23 of 101
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attribution & MMM | 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 59 → 39 of 123 |
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 Ipsos MMA 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 Ipsos MMA 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 | 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 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
Paraphrase4 labelsNone
Comparative12 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative22 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.
“Specializes in advanced econometric modeling and is widely used for strategic planning and budget optimization.” Mistral Small · Attribution & MMM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Strong in real-time optimization, halo/synergy effects; trusted for large budgets & C-suite insights.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Attribution & MMM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Traditional media-heavy brands | Strong consulting arm, established methodology” Kimi K2 · Attribution & MMM · 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 enterprise MMM platforms (Analytic Partners, Ipsos MMA) which typically start at $100K+/year” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Attribution & MMM · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Limitations: Costly, requires significant analyst involvement.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Attribution & MMM · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Ipsos MMA, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Ipsos MMA was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Ipsos MMA, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Ipsos MMA 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 Ipsos MMA. 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 22 of the 22 answers that named Ipsos MMA and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
research.oz.spotlightar.com16
cometly.com14
improvado.io11
segmentstream.com11
activecampaign.com10
measured.com10
thecmo.com10
hyscaler.com9
keends.com8
matomo.org8
107 of the 107 domain citations in answers naming Ipsos MMA came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
ipsos.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Ipsos MMA takes 0% of first choices and Dreamdata takes 27%.ShowHide
Search and answers
ipsos.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Ipsos MMA takes 0% of first choices and Dreamdata takes 27%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “marketing attribution and marketing mix modeling platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best marketing attribution and marketing mix modeling platform”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 210 a month (“ipsos mma”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 2 a month
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 39 of 123 in Attribution & MMM
Segment leader
27%
Dreamdata
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 22 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 22 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.
Names read as Ipsos MMA
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Ipsos MMA; a claim can dispute any of them.
Ipsos MMA (NexGen Activate) 1
Follow Ipsos MMA
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
Ipsos is the company behind Ipsos MMA.ShowHide
The company
Ipsos is the company behind Ipsos MMA.
ShowHideIs 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 Ipsos MMA'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 Ipsos MMA, 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 Ipsos MMA by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Ipsos MMA 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 Ipsos MMA, 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.