Recast

Named in 12 judge labels across 1 category by 5 of 6 models in the September 2026 Edition. 0 first choices, 2 negative labels. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-08.5.

Best standing

0% in Attribution & MMM

Rank 10 of 82 products named in attribution and marketing mix modeling, accepted challenger. 0 of 6 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 17% of its 12 labels there were negative.

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Recast. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Vertical	First choices	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Attribution and marketing mix modeling	Marketing	0%	10 of 82	17%	12	accepted challenger

By model

How each model treated Recast across every prompt where it was named. Six models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Opus 5	0	1	0	2	3
Claude Opus 4.8	0	1	1	0	2
GPT-6 Astra	0	2	0	0	2
GPT-5.6 Sol	0	1	1	0	2
Gemini 3.1 Pro	2	0	1	0	3
Perplexity Sonar Pro	0	0	0	0	0

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Look for modern SaaS MMM tools (like *Recast, Measured, Sellforte, LiftLab,* ...) that ingest data weekly or daily” Gemini 3.1 Pro · Attribution & MMM · negative prompt · first choice

“A highly popular Bayesian MMM platform... updates in near real-time” Gemini 3.1 Pro · Attribution & MMM · comparative prompt · first choice

“Bayesian MMM with a strong emphasis on out-of-sample forecast accuracy... Particularly worth evaluating with finance and analytics stakeholders.” GPT-6 Astra · Attribution & MMM · comparative prompt · alternative

“Bayesian MMM aimed at technically sophisticated in-house teams; emphasizes model transparency and validation” Claude Opus 5 · Attribution & MMM · 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.

“Recast, one of the better self-service platforms, requires around 27 months of historical channel-level spend and revenue data” Claude Opus 5 · Attribution & MMM · direct prompt · soft negative

“but it's built for teams with a data scientist in-house” Claude Opus 5 · Attribution & MMM · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Names read as Recast

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

Every label used the canonical name.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page gets a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Recast, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a logo and one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or quadrants, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. Sponsorship is separate: a sponsor funds categories or buyer dimensions and is named on what it funded, and the rules are the same for every sponsor.