GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Obsidian · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Obsidian

8Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

1Category

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

Standing

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Obsidian was named 8 times in Knowledge base, where Notion led with 18%. 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 96

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In knowledge base · 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 Obsidian 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
Knowledge base and self-service	Customer	0%	29 of 96	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by Notion at 18%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Obsidian 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 Obsidian 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	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 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.

“Best For: Solo researchers, developers, or creators who want full control over their notes.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Knowledge base · 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.

“Why to avoid for teams: ... fundamentally built for a single user.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Knowledge base · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

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

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Confluence8 of 80Not in the top three

Notion8 of 80Not in the top three

Document3607 of 81Not in the top three

Guru7 of 80Not in the top three

Nuclino6 of 80Not in the top three

Slite6 of 80Not in the top three

Bloomfire5 of 80Not in the top three

Tettra5 of 80Not in the top three

Help Scout4 of 80Not in the top three

Stonly4 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.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Obsidian. 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 8 answers that named Obsidian and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

assembly.com1

eesel.ai1

egain.com1

guideflow.com1

helpscout.com1

monday.com1

slite.com1

text.com1

zendesk.com1

Nine of the nine domain citations in answers naming Obsidian came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

assembly.com/blog/best-knowledge-base-software1

eesel.ai/blog/best-ai-tools-for-knowledge-base-management1

egain.com/best-knowledge-base-software-20261

guideflow.com/blog/best-knowledge-base-software1

helpscout.com/blog/knowledge-base-software1

monday.com/blog/service/enterprise-knowledge-base-platforms1

slite.com/learn/knowledge-base-softwares1

text.com/blog/top-10-knowledge-base-software1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 Obsidian'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 Obsidian, 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 obsidian.ai 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.