Every category where a model named Oliv 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%	20 of 75	0%	9	under 10 labels · led by Avoma at 20%
Customer success platforms	Customer	0%	14 of 69	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by ChurnZero at 39%
Customer intelligence and data science	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	79 of 158	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Google Analytics 4 at 16%

Movement

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

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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative16 labels5not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labels1

Scale-constrained6 labels1

Negative3 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative38 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 8 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.

“Highest score (74/80) as the only truly AI-native platform with autonomous agents that execute work” MiniMax M2.5 · Customer success · comparative prompt · first choice

“Recognized as a rising star for mid-market teams seeking "agentic" workflow automation.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Revenue intel · direct prompt · alternative

“Oliv AI (Emerging Leader) ... Lowest time-to-value; reduces manual administrative work” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Customer success · comparative prompt · alternative

“If you want to automate away CRM data entry entirely ... choose Oliv AI.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Revenue 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Oliv, over the 38 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Oliv was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Gong27 of 389Not in the top three

Clari Copilot26 of 387Not in the top three

Avoma21 of 389Not in the top three

Revenue Grid17 of 380Not in the top three

HubSpot Sales Hub13 of 381Not in the top three

Salesloft10 of 381Not in the top three

Gainsight9 of 384Not in the top three

People.ai9 of 380Not in the top three

Vitally8 of 381Not in the top three

Chorus by ZoomInfo8 of 380Not 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 Oliv. 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 38 answers that named Oliv and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

articsledge.com1

avoma.com1

cleverly.co1

demandbase.com1

gartner.com1

getmaxiq.com1

gitnux.org1

goairspeed.com1

guideflow.com1

kurums.com1

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

Pages cited

articsledge.com/post/best-revenue-intelligence-platforms1

avoma.com/blog/best-revenue-intelligence-software1

cleverly.co/blog/revenue-intelligence-tools1

demandbase.com/blog/revenue-intelligence-platforms1

gartner.com/reviews/market/revenue-intelligence1

getmaxiq.com/blog/best-revenue-intelligence-platforms1

gitnux.org/best/revenue-intelligence-software1

goairspeed.com/academy/alternatives/best-revenue-intelligence-platforms1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Oliv

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

Oliv AI 14Oliv.ai 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 Oliv'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 Oliv, 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 oliv.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.