GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Stream Chat · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Stream Chat

8Judge labels

1First choices

0Negative labels

4 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Stream Chat was named 4 times in In-app messaging, where Intercom led with 20%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business38 of 112

under the label threshold

Mid-market12 of 113

under the label threshold

Enterprise35 of 96

under the label threshold

In in-app messaging · 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 Stream Chat 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
In-app messaging and customer communications	Customer	2%	12 of 113	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by Intercom at 20%

Movement

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

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 labels1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 label1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 3 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.

“Safer Alternatives to Consider | Stream Chat | SOC 2, GDPR, HIPAA compliant; AES-256 encryption” Kimi K2 · In-app messaging · negative prompt · first choice

“Final Recommendation: Start with Stream Chat if dev resources allow” Grok 4.1 Fast · In-app messaging · direct prompt · first choice

“Strong Free Alternatives (if Tencent doesn't fit) 1. Stream Chat (GetStream)” Grok 4.1 Fast · In-app messaging · budget 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Stream Chat, over the 8 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Stream Chat was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CometChat6 of 81Not in the top three

Intercom5 of 82Not in the top three

Sendbird5 of 80Not in the top three

OneSignal4 of 80Not in the top three

Userpilot3 of 81Not in the top three

Braze3 of 80Not in the top three

Twilio Conversations3 of 80Not in the top three

Zendesk3 of 80Not in the top three

Pendo2 of 81Not in the top three

Chameleon2 of 80Not 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.

Names read as Stream Chat

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Stream Chat; a claim can dispute any of them.

Stream Chat (GetStream) 1Stream Chat (by SendBird/Stream) 1

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 Stream Chat'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 Stream Chat, 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 streamchat.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.