Every category where a model named Kickbox 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
Email verification	GTM data and infrastructure	4%	6 of 53	0%	27	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct17 labels2

Paraphrase10 labels3

Comparative27 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained7 labelsNone

Scale-constrained13 labels1

Negative14 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative88 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 9 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.

“The best email verification service for a mid-market B2B company is Hunter, Clearout, or Kickbox” Llama 4 Maverick · Email verification · direct prompt · first choice

“or Kickbox if you want point-of-entry validation integrated into your existing tech stack.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Email verification · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“include Bouncer, ZeroBounce, Kickbox, and NeverBounce” Kimi K2 · Email verification · negative prompt · first choice

“For developers/APIs: Kickbox — interactive docs, sandbox mode... one of the best developer experiences.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Email verification · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Kickbox, over the 88 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Kickbox was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

ZeroBounce84 of 8832Not in the top three

NeverBounce66 of 884Not in the top three

Hunter57 of 8811Not in the top three

Bouncer55 of 8818Not in the top three

Clearout52 of 884Not in the top three

Emailable39 of 881Not in the top three

DeBounce29 of 881Not in the top three

EmailListVerify25 of 881Not in the top three

MillionVerifier20 of 880Not in the top three

Snov.io13 of 880Not 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 Kickbox. 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 10 of the 88 answers that named Kickbox and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

hunter.io7

zerobounce.net7

clearout.io4

debounce.com4

lagrowthmachine.com4

mailtrap.io4

usebouncer.com4

emailable.com3

instantly.ai3

snov.io3

Forty-three of the forty-three domain citations in answers naming Kickbox came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

hunter.io/email-verification-guide/best-email-verifiers6

debounce.com/blog/email-verification-tools4

mailtrap.io/blog/email-verification-tools4

usebouncer.com/best-email-verification-tools4

clearout.io/email-verification-tools3

instantly.ai/blog/2026-email-verification-benchmark-accuracy-scores-for-8-top-tools3

lagrowthmachine.com/email-verification-software-20263

snov.io/blog/email-verification-services3

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 Kickbox'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 Kickbox, 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 kickbox.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.