Every category where a model named Onclusive 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	0%	12 of 65	8%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Onclusive 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 Onclusive 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	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	1	2	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative20 labels4not counted in share

Budget-constrained8 labelsNone

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative45 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 4 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.

“Onclusive: Most comprehensive - monitors digital, newswire, print, broadcast, radio, and social” GLM 4.7 FlashX · PR · comparative prompt · first choice

“Choose Onclusive if: You need to prove PR's business impact with strong analytics” Kimi K2 · PR · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best For: Enterprise global PR teams needing broad multi-channel monitoring” DeepSeek V4 Flash · PR · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for Monitoring-Only” Mistral Small · PR · direct 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.

“MODERATE-HIGH RISK” DeepSeek V4 Flash · PR · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Onclusive, over the 45 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Onclusive was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Meltwater45 of 4517Not in the top three

Cision37 of 456Not in the top three

Muck Rack31 of 454Not in the top three

Brandwatch25 of 450Not in the top three

Talkwalker21 of 450Not in the top three

Brand2419 of 454Not in the top three

Agility PR Solutions18 of 450Not in the top three

LexisNexis Newsdesk13 of 450Not in the top three

Mention12 of 450Not in the top three

TVEyes12 of 450Not 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 Onclusive. 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 9 of the 45 answers that named Onclusive and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

onclusive.comYour site7

gartner.com5

learn.g2.com5

meltwater.com5

pr.co5

prowly.com5

visualping.io5

forbes.com4

guideflow.com4

improvado.io4

Forty-two of the forty-nine domain citations in answers naming Onclusive came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/pr-and-media-monitoring-tools5

visualping.io/blog/top-pr-monitoring-tools5

forbes.com/sites/johnhall/2024/11/22/pr-tools-to-boost-and-monitor-media-attention4

improvado.io/blog/best-digital-pr-tools-and-software4

learn.g2.com/best-pr-analytics-software4

onclusive.com/resources/blog/media-monitoring-tools-20264

prlab.co/blog/the-best-media-monitoring-tools-for-news-and-social-media4

prowly.com/magazine/brand-monitoring-software4

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 Onclusive'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 Onclusive, 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 onclusive.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.