Every category where a model named Swipe Pages 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
Landing pages and interactive content	Marketing	0%	15 of 78	0%	19	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct4 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative17 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative12 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative40 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

“If you are a freelancer or startup on a budget: Choose Leadpages or Swipe Pages” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Landing pages · comparative prompt · alternative

“a strong mid-market fit when you want performance-focused landing pages” Perplexity Sonar · Landing pages · direct prompt · alternative

“Swipe Pages — best if speed/mobile performance is a priority.” GPT-5.4 mini · Landing pages · comparative prompt · alternative

“7. Swipe Pages - Best for Mobile Performance” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Landing pages · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Swipe Pages, over the 40 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Swipe Pages was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Leadpages39 of 4010Not in the top three

Unbounce36 of 4012Not in the top three

Instapage32 of 4010Not in the top three

Carrd27 of 402Not in the top three

Landingi27 of 401Not in the top three

HubSpot Landing Pages18 of 400Not in the top three

Webflow14 of 400Not in the top three

MailerLite13 of 401Not in the top three

GetResponse10 of 400Not in the top three

ClickFunnels9 of 400Not 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 Swipe Pages. 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 7 of the 40 answers that named Swipe Pages and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

perspective.co6

emailvendorselection.com4

ventureharbour.com4

zoho.com4

blog.hubspot.com3

fitsmallbusiness.com3

guideflow.com3

prismic.io3

uithings.com3

websiteplanet.com3

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

Pages cited

perspective.co/article/best-landing-page-builder5

emailvendorselection.com/best-landing-page-builders4

ventureharbour.com/best-landing-page-builders4

zoho.com/landingpage/bootcamp/best-landing-page-builders.html4

blog.hubspot.com/marketing/best-landing-page-builder3

fitsmallbusiness.com/best-landing-page-builders3

guideflow.com/blog/best-landing-page-builders3

prismic.io/blog/the-12-best-landing-page-builders-detailed-comparison3

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 Swipe Pages'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 Swipe Pages, 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 swipepages.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.