Every category where a model named Kontakt.io 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
Retail, proximity and IoT marketing	Marketing	2%	10 of 131	7%	27	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Kontakt.io 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 Kontakt.io 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	1	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	3	0	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	2	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	3	0	1	5
Mistral Small	1	3	0	0	4
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	2	1	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	1	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	2	0	0	2
Kimi K2	0	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	2	1	0	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

Direct9 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative26 labels5not counted in share

Budget-constrained10 labels1

Scale-constrained10 labels2

Negative10 labels4not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative68 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 12 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.

“Kontakt.io (Best Overall) ... Highest overall score (9.6/10) across features, ease of use, and value” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Proximity · comparative prompt · first choice

“Kontakt.io is considered the best overall platform for indoor location, with a score of 9.6/10.” Llama 4 Maverick · Proximity · comparative prompt · first choice

“Best overall: Kontakt.io (enterprise) and Foursquare (no-hardware approach)” MiniMax M2.5 · Proximity · comparative prompt · first choice

“Kontakt.io – Strongest overall, best for beacon hardware programs” MiniMax M2.5 · Proximity · scale prompt · first choice

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 tools like Kontakt.io” Grok 4.1 Fast · Proximity · budget prompt · hard negative

“more of a managed, enterprise-leaning solution, so it's usually not the cheapest choice for a tight budget” GPT-5.4 mini · Proximity · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Kontakt.io, over the 68 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Kontakt.io was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Radar44 of 6811Not in the top three

Foursquare37 of 689Not in the top three

Estimote33 of 682Not in the top three

PlotProjects29 of 685Not in the top three

Bluedot25 of 681Not in the top three

GroundTruth23 of 681Not in the top three

InMarket18 of 683Not in the top three

Gimbal17 of 684Not in the top three

Propulso9 of 682Not in the top three

YOOSE8 of 680Not 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 Kontakt.io. 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 8 of the 68 answers that named Kontakt.io and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

f6s.com5

g2.com5

mobilozophy.com5

thecmo.com5

worldmetrics.org5

gartner.com3

gitnux.org3

skynettechnologies.com3

slashdot.org3

us.fitgap.com3

Forty of the forty domain citations in answers naming Kontakt.io came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

f6s.com/software/category/proximity-marketing5

mobilozophy.com/products/automation/engagement/proximity-marketing-platform-new5

thecmo.com/tools/best-proximity-marketing-software5

g2.com/categories/location-based-marketing4

g2.com/categories/mobile-marketing/f/proximity-marketing4

gartner.com/reviews/market/location-based-marketing-software3

gitnux.org/best/proximity-marketing-software3

gitnux.org/best/proximity-software3

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 Kontakt.io'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 Kontakt.io, 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 kontakt.io 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.