GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Meta Platforms · September 2026 Edition

Meta · 2 categories · Named, not ranked

Meta Platforms

4Judge labels

0First choices

4Negative labels

3 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. Meta Platforms was named 2 times in Content marketing and 1 other category, where HubSpot Content Hub led with 30%. 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-market146 of 159

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In content marketing · 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 Meta Platforms 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
Content marketing platforms	Marketing	0%	146 of 159	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 30%
Video advertising	Marketing	0%	113 of 121	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by StackAdapt at 24%

Movement

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative4 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“Scam ad epidemic: Meta internally projects 10% of 2024 revenue ($16B) came from scam/fraudulent ads” Mistral Small · Content marketing · negative prompt · hard negative

“Meta earns $7 billion annually from high-risk scam ads” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Video ads · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Meta Platforms, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Meta Platforms was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

TikTok Ads2 of 40Not in the top three

YouTube Ads2 of 40Not in the top three

Google Performance Max1 of 40Not in the top three

Google's native review system1 of 40Not in the top three

Meta Ads1 of 40Not in the top three

Reddit1 of 40Not in the top three

Trustpilot1 of 40Not in the top three

Views4You1 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 Meta Platforms. 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 Meta Platforms and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

businessofapps.com1

coxmedia.com1

econsultancy.com1

emarketer.com1

explodingtopics.com1

fastercapital.com1

intelegencia.com1

madgicx.com1

marketintelo.com1

medium.com1

Ten of the ten domain citations in answers naming Meta Platforms came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

businessofapps.com/ads/video1

coxmedia.com/learning-hub/insights/the-basics-of-brand-safety-and-viewability-for-digital-1

econsultancy.com/video-ctv-trends-20251

emarketer.com/content/digital-video-leads-2026-ad-priority-brand-safety-concerns-remain1

emarketer.com/content/faq-on-brand-safety--how-ai-content-creator-marketing-reshaping-risk1

explodingtopics.com/blog/future-of-advertising1

fastercapital.com/content/Video-advertising--Brand-Safety--Ensuring-Brand-Safety-in-the-Co1

intelegencia.com/blog/digital-marketing/video-advertising-trends-platforms-and-strategies-1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Meta Platforms

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

Meta Platforms (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp) 1Meta Platforms (Facebook/Instagram) 1

The company

Meta Platforms.

Website: meta.com
Headquarters: Menlo Park, United States
Founded: 2004
Employees: about 58,604 (2020)
Ownership: Public, META on Nasdaq

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 · LinkedIn · 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 Meta Platforms'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 Meta Platforms, 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 meta.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.