Small business▼−4Since September 2026: 4% → 0%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 6 → 22 of 90
1 category · RankedReviewTrackers
67Judge labels
8First choices
7Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
1Category
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
12% in Reviews for mid-market buyers
Rank 2 of 92 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
5 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 25 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of ReviewTrackers →By buyer segmentStrongest at mid-market.
Small business24 of 97
0%16 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market2 of 92
12%25 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise6 of 88
2%26 labels
accepted challenger
In reviews · 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 ReviewTrackers 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Review and reputation management | Marketing | 12% | 2 of 92 | 0% | 25 | accepted challenger | ▲+3Since September 2026: 9% → 12%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, ReviewTrackers held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Reviews · by segment
Mid-market▲+3Since September 2026: 9% → 12%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
12%from 9% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 3 → 2 of 86
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 11 → 5 of 84
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 9% | 12% | ▲+3Since September 2026: 9% → 12%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 → 2 of 92 |
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 ReviewTrackers 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 ReviewTrackers 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
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
Direct17 labels5
Paraphrase6 labels2
Comparative21 labelsNone
Budget-constrained5 labels1
Scale-constrained13 labelsNone
Negative5 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative67 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 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.
“I would recommend ReviewTrackers if your main need is managing customer reviews, sentiment, and location-level feedback in one place.” Perplexity Sonar · Reviews · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“if you need broad multi-site monitoring/analytics for a mid-market B2B brand, ReviewTrackers is the consensus top pick” Muse Glimmer 30B · Reviews · direct prompt · first choice
“The best online review management platform for a mid-market B2B company is ReviewTrackers, Grade.us, or Bazaarvoice.” Llama 4 Maverick · Reviews · direct prompt · first choice
“Start with ReviewTrackers for robust monitoring and response workflows at reasonable mid-market pricing.” Kimi K2 · Reviews · direct 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ReviewTrackers, over the 67 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ReviewTrackers was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ReviewTrackers, over the 67 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ReviewTrackers 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 ReviewTrackers. 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 60 of the 67 answers that named ReviewTrackers and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
birdeye.com46
g2.com36
usa.inquirer.net36
learn.g2.com30
appfollow.io29
zapier.com28
viasocket.com27
surveysparrow.com18
thecmo.com18
wiserreview.com16
284 of the 284 domain citations in answers naming ReviewTrackers came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
reviewtrackers.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, ReviewTrackers takes 12% of first choices and Birdeye takes 18%.ShowHide
Search and answers
reviewtrackers.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, ReviewTrackers takes 12% of first choices and Birdeye takes 18%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “online review management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best online review management platform”
5
- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,300 a month (“reviewtrackers”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 6 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 26,906 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 4,827 · 297 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 7,413
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on GoogleDetailLess1 ads · 1 text · 0 shown in the last 30 days
First shown January 2025, as InMoment, Inc., verified.
On Google's pages: 1
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
12%
rank 2 of 92 in reviews
Segment leader
18%
Birdeye
- First choices
- 8 across its categories
- Named in
- 67 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 60 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on reviewtrackers.com
567
subdomains included
Content
470
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
1 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 344 | 0 | 2024-05-31 | ||
| Report or ebook | 68 | 0 | 2021-02-23 | ||
| Case study | 25 | 0 | 2025-05-09 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 16 | 0 | 2025-05-16 | ||
| Comparison | 10 | 0 | 2022-03-03 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 4 | 0 | 2022-01-11 | ||
| Template or tool | 2 | undated | |||
| News or press | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2025-05-16Strategies for online reviews webinar or virtual event
- 2025-05-09How bettys burgers transformed customer feedback into online reputation growth case study
- 2025-02-20How this hospitality brand mastered online reputation management case study
- 2025-02-20Jax tyres auto drives success with inmoments reputation management technology case study
- 2025-02-20Yo chi increases location foot traffic by 92 in less than a year case study
- 2024-05-31Improve automotive reputation management blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page reviewtrackers.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Follow ReviewTrackers
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
ReviewTrackers is its own company.ShowHide
The company
ReviewTrackers is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Measure the Customer Experience
- For
- businesses
- Price stated
- Our pricing is location-based and designed to fit companies of all sizes. reviewtrackers.com/plans
- Free plan or trial
- Start a free trial. reviewtrackers.com/plans
- Customers named
- evoDecisionOne DentalRural KingBetty’s BurgersJAX Tyres & AutoYo-ChiWestland Insurancenbkc bank
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations, certifications, hosting
What ReviewTrackers's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: reviewtrackers.com, reviewtrackers.com/plans, reviewtrackers.com/terms-service/platform-subprocessors, reviewtrackers.com/case-studies, reviewtrackers.com/partners. 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 ReviewTrackers'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 ReviewTrackers, 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 ReviewTrackers by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where ReviewTrackers 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 ReviewTrackers, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where ReviewTrackers is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where ReviewTrackers is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideReviewTrackers is among the products AI models recommend first in Review and reputation management this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.