Small business▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 13 → 63 of 63
Optimizely · 8 categories · RankedOptimizely CMS
258Judge labels
36First choices
100Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
8Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
46% in Experimentation for enterprise buyers
Rank 5 of 71 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 47% of its 55 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Optimizely CMS →By buyer segmentAn enterprise product: leader at enterprise, not named at small business.
Small business69 of 69
0%55 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market5 of 71
7%55 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise1 of 63
46%66 labels
endorsed leader
In experimentation · 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 Optimizely CMS 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimentation and personalization | Marketing | 7% | 5 of 71 | 47% | 55 | criticized challenger | ▲+1Since September 2026: 8% → 9%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Content management systems for marketing sites | Marketing | 0% | 19 of 55 | 29% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 42% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Content marketing platforms | Marketing | 0% | 29 of 135 | 17% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 33% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| App store optimization tools | Marketing | 0% | 48 of 56 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by AppTweak at 39% | |
| Customer intelligence and data science | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 103 of 142 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Amplitude at 18% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Marketing resource management | Marketing | 0% | 97 of 110 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Wrike for Marketing at 24% | |
| Mobile apps | Marketing | 0% | 96 of 117 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Customer.io at 17% | |
| Website governance and accessibility | Marketing | 0% | 78 of 98 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Siteimprove at 25% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Optimizely CMS held within the floor in all eight categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Experimentation · by segment
Mid-market▲+1Since September 2026: 8% → 9%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
9%from 8% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 4 of 68, unchanged
Enterprise▲+7Since September 2026: 45% → 52%, +7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
52%from 45% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 1 of 53, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimentation | 8% | 9% | ▲+1Since September 2026: 8% → 9%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 5 of 71 |
| Marketing CMS | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 45 → 19 of 55 |
| Content marketing | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 42 → 29 of 135 |
| App store optimization | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 48 of 56, unchanged |
| Customer intel | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 111 → 103 of 142 |
| Marketing resource mgt | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 97 of 110, unchanged |
| Mobile apps | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 96 of 117, unchanged |
| Website governance | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 78 of 98, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Optimizely CMS across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Optimizely CMS across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 2 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 10 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 6 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 7 |
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
Direct42 labels15
Paraphrase38 labels10
Comparative64 labels18not counted in share
Budget-constrained35 labels4
Scale-constrained35 labels7
Negative44 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative258 labels in all, every segment counted; 36 of the 55 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.
“I'd lean toward VWO or Optimizely depending on your budget... Optimizely provides more advanced personalization if you have the budget.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Experimentation · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Leader in Digital Experience Platforms (DXP)... For Enterprise Organizations: Optimizely, Dynamic Yield, or Monetate offer comprehensive suites” MiniMax M2.5 · Experimentation · comparative prompt · first choice
“The heavyweight, "do-everything" enterprise platform... Recognized as a Leader in the *Gartner Magic Quadrant for Personalization Engines*” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Experimentation · comparative prompt · first choice
“shortlist 3 platforms (e.g., Optimizely + one mid-market option like AB Tasty or Kameleoon + one specialized option for your sector)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Experimentation · scale prompt · first choice
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.
“more enterprise-y, pricier ~$36K/yr min, dev-heavy). Avoid if mid-market budget/timeline constrained.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Experimentation · direct prompt · hard negative
“What to avoid at this size: Optimizely is enterprise and engineering-led... typically overkill” Muse Glimmer 30B · Experimentation · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise tools like Optimizely or Adobe Target—they typically start at $36k+/year.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Experimentation · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid: AB Tasty and Optimizely. These platforms typically require custom quotes” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Experimentation · budget prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Optimizely CMS, over the 258 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Optimizely CMS was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Optimizely CMS, over the 258 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Optimizely CMS was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 Optimizely CMS. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 237 of the 258 answers that named Optimizely CMS and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
guideflow.com88
optimizely.comYour site78
mida.so73
convert.com68
kameleoon.com67
contentsquare.com55
webflow.com55
personizely.net49
g2.com46
abmatic.ai45
546 of the 624 domain citations in answers naming Optimizely CMS came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
optimizely.com ranks 3 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Optimizely CMS takes 7% of first choices and VWO takes 27%.ShowHide
Search and answers
optimizely.com ranks 3 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Optimizely CMS takes 7% of first choices and VWO takes 27%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “website experimentation and personalization platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best website experimentation and personalization platform”
3
- Searches for its name, Google
- 320 a month (“optimizely cms”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 18 a month
- Its company's site
- optimizely.com shared with Optimizely's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 200,757 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 12,739 · 1,700 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 34,467
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 0 clicks and $2 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
7%
rank 5 of 71 in experimentation
Segment leader
27%
VWO
- First choices
- 36 across its categories
- Named in
- 258 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 237 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
Names read as Optimizely CMS
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Optimizely CMS; a claim can dispute any of them.
Optimizely 66Optimizely (Warehouse-Native Analytics) 1Optimizely (Web/Feature Experimentation) 1Optimizely (formerly Episerver) 1Optimizely CMS 11 and earlier 1Optimizely/Allocadia 1Sitecore/Optimizely 1
Follow Optimizely CMS
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Optimizely is the company behind Optimizely CMS.ShowHide
The company
Optimizely is the company behind Optimizely CMS.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- optimizely.com
- Headquarters
- San Francisco, United States
- Founded
- 2010
- Employees
- about 350
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Publish faster and keep your entire site performing its best, automatically.
- For
- creators
- Customers named
- NikeZoomSalesforceAlaska AirlinesVisaAdmiralSantanderThe Royal Mint
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Optimizely CMS's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: optimizely.com, optimizely.com/plans, optimizely.com/trust-center/security, optimizely.com/products/ai, optimizely.com/customers. A claimed page can correct any of 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 Optimizely CMS'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 Optimizely CMS, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Optimizely CMS by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Optimizely CMS is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Optimizely CMS, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.