GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Meltwater · September 2026 Edition

4 categories · Ranked

Meltwater

208Judge labels

31First choices

87Negative labels

12 of 12Models named it

4Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.

Best standing

57% in PR for enterprise buyers

Rank 7 of 65 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger

1 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 43% of its 56 labels there were negative.

By buyer segmentAn enterprise product: leader at enterprise, not named at small business.

Small business67 of 67

criticized challenger

Mid-market7 of 65

criticized challenger

Enterprise1 of 42

endorsed leader

In pr · 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 Meltwater 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
PR and media monitoring	Marketing	4%	7 of 65	43%	56	criticized challenger
Influencer platforms	Marketing	0%	23 of 79	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by Favikon at 27%
Review and reputation management	Marketing	0%	81 of 103	50%	4	under 10 labels · led by Birdeye at 26%
Social media management	Marketing	0%	48 of 59	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Sprout Social at 37%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	2	0	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	1	2	0	1	4
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	3	1	5	10
Perplexity Sonar	0	3	2	0	5
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1	4	6
Mistral Small	1	1	1	3	6
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	2	2	6
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	4	1	5
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	4	5
Kimi K2	1	1	2	2	6
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	1	2	2	6
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	2	3	5

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

Direct38 labels12

Paraphrase37 labels7

Comparative48 labels14not counted in share

Budget-constrained18 labels6

Scale-constrained27 labels6

Negative40 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative208 labels in all, every segment counted; 31 of the 45 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.

“Enterprise PR + social in one place → Meltwater or Cision ... Standout Strength: Widest source coverage and best PR-social integration” DeepSeek V4 Flash · PR · comparative prompt · first choice

“Often considered the industry leader for pure media monitoring... Best archive of TV, Radio, and Print news.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · PR · comparative prompt · first choice

“Meltwater | Enterprise brands needing deep social listening | 300K+ news sources, AI-powered insights” GLM 4.7 FlashX · PR · comparative prompt · first choice

“Start with Meltwater if monitoring competitors, industry trends, and brand health is 60%+ of your work.” Kimi K2 · PR · direct prompt · first choice

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.

“Meltwater is notorious for its aggressive auto-renewal clauses... they will legally lock you into another full year” Gemini 3.5 Flash · PR · negative prompt · hard negative

“rely on opaque pricing, aggressive contract terms, and bundling to maximize revenue... avoid the all-in-one suites” Kimi K2 · PR · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid Meltwater and Cision unless you have specific needs that outweigh their significant contract risks” Mistral Small · PR · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid: Enterprise platforms like Meltwater, Cision, or Muck Rack” Kimi K2 · PR · budget prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Meltwater, over the 208 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Meltwater was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Cision136 of 2086Not in the top three

Muck Rack117 of 20821Not in the top three

Brandwatch92 of 2081Not in the top three

Brand2481 of 20828Not in the top three

Semrush AI PR Toolkit70 of 20822Not in the top three

Mention59 of 2089Not in the top three

Talkwalker51 of 2080Not in the top three

Agility PR Solutions48 of 2086Not in the top three

Onclusive45 of 2082Not in the top three

Google Alerts33 of 2082Not 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 Meltwater. 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 32 of the 208 answers that named Meltwater and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

meltwater.comYour site19

guideflow.com16

prlab.co16

learn.g2.com14

gartner.com11

brand24.com10

onclusive.com10

pr.co10

prowly.com10

agilitypr.com9

106 of the 125 domain citations in answers naming Meltwater came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

prlab.co/blog/the-best-media-monitoring-tools-for-news-and-social-media14

guideflow.com/blog/media-monitoring-software10

gartner.com/reviews/market/pr-and-media-monitoring-tools9

improvado.io/blog/best-digital-pr-tools-and-software9

cloro.dev/blog/media-monitoring-tools8

learn.g2.com/best-pr-analytics-software8

prlab.co/blog/best-pr-tools8

pr.co/blog/top-10-pr-software-for-20267

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Meltwater

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

Meltwater (Klear) 1Meltwater (with Klear) 1Meltwater/Klear 1

The company

Meltwater Group is the company behind Meltwater.

Website: meltwater.com
Headquarters: San Francisco
Founded: 2001

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 · Crunchbase

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 Meltwater'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 Meltwater, 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 meltwater.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.