GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Seobility · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Seobility

3Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

3 of 12Models named it

2Categories

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. Seobility was named 2 times in AI visibility and 1 other category, where Otterly led with 20%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market68 of 119

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In ai visibility · 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 Seobility 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
AI visibility and answer engine tracking tools	Marketing	0%	68 of 119	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Otterly at 20%
SEO and content optimization platforms	Marketing	0%	87 of 113	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Surfer SEO at 25%

Movement

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

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

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 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.

“SEO teams wanting AI + traditional search combined” MiniMax M2.5 · AI visibility · paraphrase 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.

“recurring issues like trial-to-paid surprises, difficulty canceling, or being charged after cancellation. Examples ... Seobility” GPT-5.4 mini · SEO · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Seobility, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Seobility was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Lumar2 of 30Not in the top three

SE Ranking1 of 31Not in the top three

SE Visible1 of 31Not in the top three

Ahrefs1 of 30Not in the top three

AutoSEO1 of 30Not in the top three

BrightEdge1 of 30Not in the top three

BrightLocal1 of 30Not in the top three

Conductor1 of 30Not in the top three

Copy.ai1 of 30Not in the top three

DeepCrawl1 of 30Not 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 Seobility. 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 3 answers that named Seobility and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com1

trustpilot.com1

Two of the two domain citations in answers naming Seobility came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

g2.com/categories/seo-tools1

trustpilot.com/review/seo.ai1

trustpilot.com/review/seowriting.ai1

trustpilot.com/review/surferseo.com1

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Seobility'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 Seobility, 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 seobility.net 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.