GTM AI Index
Index › Vendors › LiveIntent · September 2026 Edition
2 categories · Named, not ranked

LiveIntent

4Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
4 of 12Models named it
2Categories
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
3 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. LiveIntent was named 3 times in Identity and 1 other category, where Hightouch led with 15%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market48 of 151
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise94 of 137
0%1 label
under the label threshold
In identity · 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 LiveIntent 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
Identity resolutionGTM data and infrastructure0%48 of 1510%2under 10 labels · led by Hightouch at 15%
Native and content advertisingMarketing0%49 of 720%1under 10 labels · led by StackAdapt at 23%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for LiveIntent 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 LiveIntent across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500101
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast00000
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash01001
Llama 4 Maverick00101
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00000
MiniMax M2.500000

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
Comparative3 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.

“Email-centric identity? → LiveIntent” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Identity · 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 LiveIntent, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LiveIntent was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
LiveRamp3 of 42Not in the top three
Amperity3 of 41Not in the top three
Acxiom3 of 40Not in the top three
FullContact3 of 40Not in the top three
ID53 of 40Not in the top three
InfoSum3 of 40Not in the top three
CustomerLabs 1PD Ops2 of 40Not in the top three
Epsilon2 of 40Not in the top three
Experian2 of 40Not in the top three
Hightouch2 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 LiveIntent. 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 LiveIntent and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

7searchppc.com1
aidigital.com1
madgicx.com1
osmos.ai1
realize.com1
voluum.com1

Six of the six domain citations in answers naming LiveIntent came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

7searchppc.com/blog/native-advertising-platforms1
aidigital.com/blog/native-advertising-platforms1
madgicx.com/blog/ad-tech-platform-for-native-advertising1
osmos.ai/blog/native-advertising-retail-media-benchmarks-20261
realize.com/marketing-hub/native-advertising-platform1
voluum.com/blog/best-ad-networks1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as LiveIntent

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as LiveIntent; a claim can dispute any of them.
Liveintent 1
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 LiveIntent'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 LiveIntent, 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 liveintent.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