GTM AI Index
Index Vendors › ProProfs Chat · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Named, not ranked

ProProfs Chat

5Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
3 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
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. ProProfs Chat was named 2 times in Support chatbots, where Intercom led with 35%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In support chatbots · 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 ProProfs Chat 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Chatbots and conversational AI for supportCustomer0%37 of 1060%2under 10 labels · led by Intercom at 35%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for ProProfs Chat 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 ProProfs Chat across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast01001
Mistral Small01001
DeepSeek V4 Flash00000
Llama 4 Maverick00000
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00000
MiniMax M2.500000

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
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained4 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 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 Free AI Chatbot with Features* - Forever-free plan with full AI capabilities” Mistral Small · Support chatbots · budget prompt · alternative
“Free forever (1 operator, full core features like drag-and-drop bots, handoff)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Support chatbots · budget 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 ProProfs Chat, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ProProfs Chat was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Tidio5 of 54Not in the top three
Freshchat4 of 50Not in the top three
ManyChat4 of 50Not in the top three
HubSpot Service Hub2 of 50Not in the top three
Zendesk2 of 50Not in the top three
tawk.to2 of 50Not in the top three
Chatsy1 of 51Not in the top three
ChatGPT/Claude1 of 50Not in the top three
Chatbase1 of 50Not in the top three
Chatfuel1 of 50Not 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 ProProfs Chat. 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 5 answers that named ProProfs Chat and are not a share of its labels.

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 ProProfs Chat'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 ProProfs Chat, 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 proprofschat.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.

Subscribe to the pack