GTM AI Index

Index › Products › MailGenius · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

MailGenius

4Judge labels

1First choices

0Negative labels

4 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, 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. MailGenius was named 3 times in Email deliverability, where GlockApps led with 34%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business24 of 114

under the label threshold

Mid-market44 of 110

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In email deliverability · 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 MailGenius 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	Since September 2026
Email deliverability and testing tools	Marketing	0%	44 of 110	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by GlockApps at 34%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for MailGenius yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated MailGenius across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
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	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	1	1

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

Paraphrase1 label1

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.

“Similar to Mail-Tester, it evaluates your email for spam triggers” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Email deliverability · budget 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 MailGenius, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and MailGenius was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

GlockApps4 of 41Not among the top eight

MXToolbox3 of 40Not among the top eight

Mailtrap3 of 40Not among the top eight

Google Postmaster Tools2 of 41Not among the top eight

Folderly2 of 40Not among the top eight

Mail-Tester2 of 40Not among the top eight

Warmy2 of 40Not among the top eight

ZeroBounce2 of 40Not among the top eight

Bouncer1 of 40Not among the top eight

DeBounce1 of 40Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 MailGenius. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 4 of the 4 answers that named MailGenius and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

mailgenius.comYour site3

mailtrap.io3

brevo.com2

emailtooltester.com2

guideflow.com2

inboxarmy.com2

instantly.ai2

omnisend.com2

overloop.com2

sender.net2

Nineteen of the twenty-two domain citations in answers naming MailGenius came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

mailgenius.com/3

mailtrap.io/blog/email-deliverability-tools3

brevo.com/blog/email-deliverability-tools2

emailtooltester.com/en/blog/best-email-deliverability-tools2

inboxarmy.com/blog/12-best-email-deliverability-tools2

instantly.ai/blog/email-deliverability-monitoring-tools2

omnisend.com/blog/email-deliverability-tools2

overloop.com/blog/email-deliverability-tools2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow MailGenius

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

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 MailGenius'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 MailGenius, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for MailGenius by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where MailGenius is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name MailGenius, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.