Every category where a model named Stannp 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
Print	Marketing	7%	3 of 58	0%	21	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative16 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained14 labels6

Scale-constrained4 labels1

Negative7 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative51 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 11 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.

“Start with Click2Mail (no monthly fees) or Stannp ($0-$12/month) to test direct mail without commitment.” Kimi K2 · Direct mail · budget prompt · first choice

“Safer Alternatives to Consider ... Stannp | Very low | 4.8/5 G2 rating, affordable pricing” Kimi K2 · Direct mail · negative prompt · first choice

“Stannp (4.8/5 on G2) – good address verification, tracking, and support” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Direct mail · negative prompt · first choice

“developer-led and want programmatic control: → Lob or Stannp” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Direct mail · comparative prompt · first choice

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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Stannp, over the 51 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Stannp was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Postalytics50 of 5127Compare →

Lob43 of 514Compare →

Click2Mail39 of 515Not in the top three

Mailjoy39 of 513Not in the top three

PostGrid31 of 513Not in the top three

Sendoso31 of 510Not in the top three

Reachdesk19 of 510Not in the top three

PFL17 of 511Not in the top three

Postal16 of 510Not in the top three

Postie14 of 511Not 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 Stannp. 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 51 answers that named Stannp and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

aijourn.com1

capterra.com1

cience.com1

f6s.com1

fitsmallbusiness.com1

getapp.com1

gitnux.org1

guideflow.com1

gundir.com1

mailtrap.io1

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

Pages cited

aijourn.com/best-direct-mail-automation-platforms-for-ai-driven-marketing-teams1

capterra.com/direct-mail-automation-software1

cience.com/blog/direct-mail-automation-software1

f6s.com/software/category/direct-mail-automation1

fitsmallbusiness.com/best-direct-mail-service1

getapp.com/all-software/direct-mail-automation/org/small-business1

gitnux.org/best/direct-mail-automation-software1

guideflow.com/blog/direct-mail-automation-software1

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 Stannp'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 Stannp, 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 stannp.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.