mParticle

Named in 13 judge labels across 2 categories by 5 of 6 models in the September 2026 Edition. 0 first choices, 5 negative labels. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-08.5.

Best standing

0% in CDP

Rank 11 of 35 products named in customer data platforms, criticized challenger. 0 of 6 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 27% of its 11 labels there were negative.

Standing by category

Every category where a model named mParticle. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Vertical	First choices	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Customer data platforms	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	11 of 35	27%	11	criticized challenger
Data warehouse and reverse ETL for marketing	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	61 of 62	100%	2	under 10 labels

By model

How each model treated mParticle across every prompt where it was named. Six models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Opus 5	2	0	2	4
Claude Opus 4.8	0	2	0	2
GPT-6 Astra	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.6 Sol	1	0	1	2
Gemini 3.1 Pro	0	2	1	3
Perplexity Sonar Pro	0	1	1	2

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“a packaged CDP (Segment/Twilio, mParticle, Klaviyo/Bloomreach ...) will get you to value faster” Claude Opus 5 · CDP · scale prompt · alternative

“Mobile-first product at scale? mParticle.” Claude Opus 5 · CDP · comparative prompt · alternative

“Mobile-app-first business: mParticle” GPT-5.6 Sol · CDP · 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.

“Skip: ... packaged CDPs (mParticle, Bloomreach) — you'd pay CDP prices for a warehouse you already own” Claude Opus 5 · Warehouse & ETL · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

“be very cautious about buying a traditional bundled Customer Data Platform (like standard Segment, mParticle, or Tealium)” Gemini 3.1 Pro · Warehouse & ETL · negative prompt · soft negative

“mParticle merged with Rokt in January 2025... acquisition transitions justify contractual road-map commitments” GPT-5.6 Sol · CDP · negative prompt · soft negative

“Sources specifically flag Adobe Real-Time CDP, Tealium, mParticle” Perplexity Sonar Pro · CDP · negative prompt · soft negative

Names read as mParticle

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

Every label used the canonical name.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page gets a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as mParticle, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a logo and one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or quadrants, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. Sponsorship is separate: a sponsor funds categories or buyer dimensions and is named on what it funded, and the rules are the same for every sponsor.