GTM AI Index
Index Vendors › LeanData · September 2026 Edition
3 categories · Ranked

LeanData

160Judge labels
43First choices
48Negative labels
12 of 12Models named it
3Categories
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
54% in Lead routing for enterprise buyers
Rank 2 of 104 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
5 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 20% of its 55 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentAn enterprise product: leader at enterprise, not named at small business.
In lead routing · 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 LeanData 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Lead routing and managementSales21%2 of 10420%55accepted challenger
Identity resolutionGTM data and infrastructure4%11 of 1510%3under 10 labels · led by Hightouch at 15%
Account-based marketing platformsMarketing0%52 of 760%1under 10 labels · led by AdRoll ABM at 56%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for LeanData 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 LeanData across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.521003
GPT-5.4 mini22004
Gemini 3.5 Flash60017
Perplexity Sonar12104
Grok 4.1 Fast31015
Mistral Small12115
DeepSeek V4 Flash30047
Llama 4 Maverick12205
Qwen 3.7 Flash01102
Kimi K222127
GLM 4.7 FlashX12115
MiniMax M2.503115

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
Direct32 labels17
Paraphrase32 labels16
Comparative28 labels19not counted in share
Budget-constrained19 labelsNone
Scale-constrained24 labels10
Negative25 labels5not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative160 labels in all, every segment counted; 43 of the 67 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 gold standard for Salesforce-native environments... LeanData is the market leader. However, it requires experienced RevOps administrators to maintain.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Lead routing · scale prompt · first choice
“start by evaluating Chili Piper if your bottleneck is inbound conversion speed, or LeanData if your bottleneck is messy routing logic” Kimi K2 · Lead routing · direct prompt · first choice
“LeanData | Enterprise, complex Salesforce environments | Lead-to-account matching, territories, ownership governance, audit depth” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Lead routing · scale prompt · first choice
“prioritize Salesforce-native routing tools (such as *LeanData, Traction Complete, Kubaru,* or *Distribution Engine*)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Lead routing · negative 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.

“here are the lead routing and management tools you should avoid or be cautious about... LeanData Common Issues: - Complex interface” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Lead routing · negative prompt · hard negative
“trying to buy enterprise-level lead routing platforms like LeanData, Default, or full Chili Piper suites can be incredibly frustrating” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Lead routing · budget prompt · hard negative
“LeanData / 6sense / ZoomInfo GTM Studio — Mid-five to six-figure contracts” Kimi K2 · Lead routing · budget prompt · hard negative
“1. LeanData (especially for HubSpot users) Why to avoid/caution:” Mistral Small · Lead routing · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LeanData, over the 160 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LeanData was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
HubSpot Sales Hub69 of 16016Not in the top three
Kubaru51 of 16011Not in the top three
Default46 of 1603Not in the top three
RevenueHero42 of 1603Not in the top three
Distribution Engine40 of 1601Not in the top three
Pipedrive35 of 1604Not in the top three
Salesforce Lead Assignment Rules31 of 1601Not in the top three
Traction Complete31 of 1601Not 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 LeanData. 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 29 of the 160 answers that named LeanData and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

leadangel.com16
leandata.comYour site13
default.com12
improvado.io12
articsledge.com11
guideflow.com11
croclub.com10
kubaru.io9
salesforce.com9
cal.com8

Ninety-eight of the 111 domain citations in answers naming LeanData came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

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 LeanData'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 LeanData, 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 leandata.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.

Subscribe to the pack