Every category where a model named SOCi 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
Review and reputation management	Marketing	0%	25 of 103	8%	12	accepted challenger
Retail, proximity and IoT marketing	Marketing	0%	102 of 131	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Radar at 19%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	2	0	3

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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase12 labels5

Comparative23 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained4 labels2

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative5 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative49 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 10 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.

“Multi-location: SOCi or Birdeye for scale” MiniMax M2.5 · Reviews · comparative prompt · first choice

“Do you have 50+ locations and need HQ oversight? → Choose Birdeye or SOCi.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Reviews · comparative prompt · alternative

“Enterprise PR crisis management? → Brandwatch or SOCi” Mistral Small · Reviews · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for franchises; centralizes reviews, social, and listings” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Reviews · 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.

“require a call for pricing, making budgeting difficult for small businesses” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Reviews · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SOCi, over the 49 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SOCi was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Birdeye35 of 4917Not in the top three

Reputation33 of 497Not in the top three

Podium20 of 491Not in the top three

Yext20 of 490Not in the top three

ReviewTrackers14 of 490Not in the top three

ReviewGrower12 of 491Not in the top three

NiceJob11 of 492Not in the top three

Sprout Social11 of 490Not in the top three

Chatmeter10 of 491Not in the top three

Sprinklr9 of 493Not 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 SOCi. 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 10 of the 49 answers that named SOCi and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com7

birdeye.com5

appfollow.io4

learn.g2.com4

gartner.com3

gitnux.org3

thecmo.com3

usa.inquirer.net3

alchemer.com2

almcorp.com2

Thirty-six of the thirty-six domain citations in answers naming SOCi came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

appfollow.io/blog/reputation-management-software4

birdeye.com/blog/enterprise-reputation-management-software3

learn.g2.com/best-online-reputation-management-tools3

usa.inquirer.net/191823/best-reputation-management-software3

alchemer.com/resources/blog/the-best-review-management-software-how-to-take-control-of-you2

almcorp.com/blog/top-reputation-management-tools2

birdeye.com/blog/online-reputation-management-tools2

brightlocal.com/resources/leading-reputation-management-tools-compared2

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 SOCi'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 SOCi, 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 socialpilot.co 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.