GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › MaxIQ · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

MaxIQ

8Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

5 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

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. MaxIQ was named 5 times in Revenue intel and 1 other category, where Avoma led with 20%. 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-market29 of 75

under the label threshold

Enterprise15 of 65

under the label threshold

In revenue intel · 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 MaxIQ 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
Revenue intelligence and forecasting	Sales	0%	29 of 75	25%	4	under 10 labels · led by Avoma at 20%
Conversational intelligence and call recording	Sales	0%	42 of 93	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Avoma at 52%

Movement

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

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative4 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 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.

“Higher-rated alternatives like MaxIQ (4.9) ... surface fewer complaints” Grok 4.1 Fast · Revenue intel · negative prompt · alternative

“Best value for startups but newer player” Kimi K2 · Revenue intel · budget prompt · alternative

“MaxIQ (EchoIQ), Clari Copilot.” MiniMax M2.5 · Conversation intel · 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.

“Avoid Clari/MaxIQ if you care more about coaching reps than fixing pipeline forecasts.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Revenue intel · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as MaxIQ, over the 8 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and MaxIQ was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Clari Copilot8 of 81Not in the top three

Gong8 of 81Not in the top three

Avoma5 of 80Not in the top three

Aviso3 of 80Not in the top three

Chorus by ZoomInfo3 of 80Not in the top three

Salesloft3 of 80Not in the top three

HubSpot Sales Hub2 of 81Not in the top three

Fireflies.ai2 of 80Not in the top three

People.ai2 of 80Not in the top three

Revenue.io2 of 80Not 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.

Names read as MaxIQ

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

MaxIQ (EchoIQ) 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 MaxIQ'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 MaxIQ, 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 maxiq.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.