| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Event management platforms | Marketing | 2% | 9 of 81 | 0% | 9 | under 10 labels · led by Bizzabo at 28% | |
| Event lead capture apps | Marketing | 0% | 43 of 70 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Blinq at 23% |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“starting with a free tier option like Eventleaf or RSVPify allows you to test the platform before committing financially” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Event management · budget prompt · first choice
“RSVPify: Free for free events; great for registrations, check-ins, seating charts, and analytics.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Event management · budget prompt · alternative
“Choose RSVPify if you want the easiest setup and better per-ticket pricing for paid events.” Kimi K2 · Event management · budget prompt · alternative
“RSVPify's free plan supports up to 100 RSVPs per month.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Event management · budget prompt · alternative
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.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 20 of the 20 answers that named RSVPify and are not a share of its labels.
Eighty-one of the eighty-one domain citations in answers naming RSVPify came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-11 to 2026-10 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 217 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 25 | undated | |||
| Case study | 12 | undated | |||
| Conference or event | 10 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 7 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 3 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 3 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 3 | undated | |||
| News or press | 2 | undated |
Every page rsvpify.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 October 5, 2026.
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.
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 RSVPify'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 RSVPify, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for RSVPify by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: