GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › LinkedIn articles · September 2026 Edition

LinkedIn · 1 category · Named, not ranked

LinkedIn articles

5Judge labels

0First choices

4Negative labels

5 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

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. LinkedIn articles was named 4 times in Content marketing, where HubSpot Content Hub led with 30%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business61 of 150

under the label threshold

Mid-market158 of 159

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In content marketing · 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 LinkedIn articles 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
Content marketing platforms	Marketing	0%	158 of 159	100%	4	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 30%

Movement

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“Organically, LinkedIn is arguably the best B2B content marketing platform available today. However, LinkedIn Paid Ads are a completely different story.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Content marketing · negative prompt · soft negative

“some people are growing weary of LinkedIn due to the constant stream of motivational AI-related posts” Llama 4 Maverick · Content marketing · negative prompt · soft negative

“offer discovery but don't provide a direct, portable relationship with your audience” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Content marketing · negative prompt · soft negative

“sometimes LinkedIn or TikTok, depending on your goals” Perplexity Sonar · Content marketing · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LinkedIn articles, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LinkedIn articles was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

TikTok3 of 50Not in the top three

CoSchedule2 of 50Not in the top three

Contently2 of 50Not in the top three

HubSpot Content Hub2 of 50Not in the top three

Instagram2 of 50Not in the top three

X2 of 50Not in the top three

Ahrefs1 of 50Not in the top three

Bluesky1 of 50Not in the top three

Buffer1 of 50Not in the top three

BuzzSumo1 of 50Not 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 LinkedIn articles. 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 2 of the 5 answers that named LinkedIn articles and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com2

thecmo.com2

3ptechies.com1

agencyentourage.com1

beehiiv.com1

blog.hubspot.com1

bluleadz.com1

boostability.com1

brandexposurestudio.com1

cantaloupemarketing.co.uk1

Twelve of the twelve domain citations in answers naming LinkedIn articles came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/content-marketing-platforms2

thecmo.com/tools/content-marketing-platform2

3ptechies.com/worst-places-buy-ads.html1

agencyentourage.com/blog/3-content-marketing-platforms-your-brand-is-probably-not-using1

beehiiv.com/blog/content-creator-platform1

blog.hubspot.com/marketing/scaling-content-mistakes1

blog.hubspot.com/website/content-marketing-platform1

bluleadz.com/blog/10-of-the-biggest-marketing-fails-of-20171

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as LinkedIn articles

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as LinkedIn articles; a claim can dispute any of them.

LinkedIn 4

The company

LinkedIn is the company behind LinkedIn articles.

Website: linkedin.com
Headquarters: Sunnyvale, United States
Founded: 2002

From Wikidata, fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata

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 LinkedIn articles'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 LinkedIn articles, 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 linkedin.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.