GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › RingCentral RingCX · September 2026 Edition

RingCentral · 1 category · Named, not ranked

RingCentral RingCX

9Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

6 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

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. RingCentral RingCX was named 5 times in Dialers, where Aloware led with 18%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business35 of 58

under the label threshold

Mid-market27 of 76

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In dialers · 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 RingCentral RingCX 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
Sales dialers and calling	Sales	0%	27 of 76	20%	5	under 10 labels · led by Aloware at 18%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for RingCentral RingCX 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 RingCentral RingCX across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	1	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained9 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 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.

“RingCentral RingCX at ~$75/user — the cheapest single-user predictive option” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Dialers · budget prompt · alternative

“Best for Predictive Dialing: RingCentral RingCX” Mistral Small · Dialers · 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.

“More feature-rich but higher cost” MiniMax M2.5 · Dialers · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as RingCentral RingCX, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and RingCentral RingCX was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Allo9 of 95Not in the top three

Ooma Office9 of 91Not in the top three

JustCall6 of 90Not in the top three

CloudTalk4 of 91Not in the top three

Dialpad4 of 91Not in the top three

Aloware2 of 92Not in the top three

Kixie2 of 91Not in the top three

Hot Prospector2 of 90Not in the top three

Aircall1 of 90Not in the top three

Freshsales Dialer1 of 90Not 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.

The company

RingCentral is the company behind RingCentral RingCX.

Website: ringcentral.com
Headquarters: Belmont, United States
Founded: 2003
Ownership: Public, RNG on New York Stock Exchange

From Wikidata, fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase

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 RingCentral RingCX'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 RingCentral RingCX, 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 ringcentral.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.