Every category where a model named SimpleTexting 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
Mobile marketing and push	Marketing	0%	23 of 75	9%	11	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SimpleTexting 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 SimpleTexting 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	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	0	2
Mistral Small	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	2	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	1	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase6 labels2

Comparative14 labels3not counted in share

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative15 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative43 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 6 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.

“Small Business/SMB | SimpleTexting, SlickText | Transparent pricing, good support” Kimi K2 · Mobile & push · negative prompt · alternative

“Small business simple SMS/MMS | SimpleTexting or SlickText” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Mobile & push · comparative prompt · alternative

“SimpleTexting is another good low-budget SMS option” GPT-5.4 mini · Mobile & push · budget prompt · alternative

“Top overall pick for ease of use and value ($29/mo)” Mistral Small · Mobile & push · 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.

“Why you should avoid/reconsider them: If you are running a modern e-commerce store... these tools lack deep, real-time behavioral flows” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Mobile & push · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SimpleTexting, over the 43 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SimpleTexting was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

OneSignal33 of 4315Not in the top three

Twilio Programmable Messaging23 of 432Not in the top three

Klaviyo23 of 431Not in the top three

Omnisend22 of 433Not in the top three

Attentive20 of 431Not in the top three

SlickText19 of 435Not in the top three

Braze18 of 432Not in the top three

Postscript18 of 430Not in the top three

Textedly17 of 431Not in the top three

TextMagic16 of 431Not 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 SimpleTexting. 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 2 of the 43 answers that named SimpleTexting and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

altosagency.com1

attentive.com1

bloomreach.com1

businessofapps.com1

ddiy.co1

emailvendorselection.com1

g2.com1

getapp.com1

guideflow.com1

infobip.com1

Ten of the ten domain citations in answers naming SimpleTexting came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

altosagency.com/blog/article/sms-vs-push-notifications1

attentive.com/blog/best-sms-marketing-platforms1

bloomreach.com/en/blog/best-sms-marketing-platforms1

businessofapps.com/marketplace/push-notifications1

ddiy.co/sms-marketing-software1

emailvendorselection.com/text-marketing-platforms1

g2.com/products/simpletexting/pricing1

getapp.com/marketing-software/sms-marketing/f/push-notifications1

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 SimpleTexting'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 SimpleTexting, 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 simple.io 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.