GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Maestra · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Maestra

15Judge labels

6First choices

2Negative labels

7 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Maestra was named 2 times in CDP and 1 other category, where Segment led with 48%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market46 of 59

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In cdp · 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 Maestra 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
Customer data platforms	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	46 of 59	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Segment at 48%
Ecommerce marketing	Marketing	0%	58 of 154	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Marketing Hub at 36%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
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	1	1
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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained8 labels6

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative15 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 6 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.

“Best for enterprise: Maestra — true all-in-one with dedicated support” Kimi K2 · Ecommerce marketing · 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 Maestra, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Maestra was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Braze9 of 151Not in the top three

Klaviyo6 of 152Not in the top three

HubSpot Marketing Hub6 of 150Not in the top three

Salesforce Marketing Cloud5 of 151Not in the top three

Customer.io4 of 151Not in the top three

ActiveCampaign4 of 150Not in the top three

Bloomreach4 of 150Not in the top three

Insider4 of 150Not in the top three

OneSignal3 of 151Not in the top three

Iterable3 of 150Not 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 Maestra. 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 6 of the 15 answers that named Maestra and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

maestra.ioYour site6

insiderone.com4

us.fitgap.com4

g2.com3

gartner.com3

improvado.io3

aigrowthagent.co2

businessofapps.com2

guideflow.com2

infobip.com2

Twenty-five of the thirty-one domain citations in answers naming Maestra came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

maestra.io/blog/comparisons/best-enterprise-marketing-platforms5

improvado.io/blog/top-enterprise-marketing-platforms3

infobip.com/blog/best-marketing-automation-platforms2

insiderone.com/best-marketing-automation-tools-smbs-enterprises2

knock.app/blog/the-top-marketing-automation-platforms2

maestra.io/blog/comparisons/salesforce-marketing-cloud-alternatives2

webtonic.io/blog/top-mobile-app-marketing-companies2

adlibrary.com/posts/best-mobile-advertising-apps1

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 Maestra'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 Maestra, 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 maestra.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.