GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › LinkedIn CTV Ads · September 2026 Edition

LinkedIn · 1 category · Named, not ranked

LinkedIn CTV Ads

4Judge labels

2First choices

0Negative labels

3 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. LinkedIn CTV Ads was named 2 times in Video ads, where StackAdapt led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business46 of 112

under the label threshold

Mid-market10 of 121

under the label threshold

Enterprise14 of 100

under the label threshold

In video ads · 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 CTV Ads 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
Video advertising	Marketing	2%	10 of 121	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by StackAdapt at 24%

Movement

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labels2

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.

“Start with StackAdapt or LinkedIn CTV Ads” Kimi K2 · Video ads · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“The Best for Unrivaled B2B Targeting: LinkedIn CTV Ads” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Video ads · paraphrase 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 LinkedIn CTV Ads, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LinkedIn CTV Ads was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

The Trade Desk3 of 40Not in the top three

Vibe.co2 of 41Not in the top three

Amazon DSP2 of 40Not in the top three

Google Display & Video 3602 of 40Not in the top three

StackAdapt2 of 40Not in the top three

Google Ads video campaigns1 of 41Not in the top three

Amazon Ads / Streaming TV Ads1 of 40Not in the top three

Demandbase1 of 40Not in the top three

MNTN1 of 40Not in the top three

Terminus1 of 40Not 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 CTV Ads. 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 1 of the 4 answers that named LinkedIn CTV Ads and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

advertising.amazon.com1

business.linkedin.comYour site1

support.google.com1

Two of the three domain citations in answers naming LinkedIn CTV Ads came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

advertising.amazon.com/products/sponsored-tv1

business.linkedin.com/advertise/ads/sponsored-content/connected-tv-ads1

support.google.com/google-ads/answer/23754971

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

The company

LinkedIn is the company behind LinkedIn CTV Ads.

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 CTV Ads'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 CTV Ads, 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.