GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Systeme.io · September 2026 Edition

4 categories · Named, not ranked

Systeme.io

14Judge labels

2First choices

0Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

4Categories

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

Standing

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Systeme.io was named 5 times in Customer education and 3 other categories, where TalentLMS led with 33%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market12 of 81

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In customer education · 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 Systeme.io 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
Customer education and LMS	Customer	2%	12 of 81	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by TalentLMS at 33%
Content marketing platforms	Marketing	2%	15 of 159	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 30%
Landing pages and interactive content	Marketing	0%	41 of 78	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Unbounce at 28%
Webinar and virtual event platforms	Marketing	0%	45 of 71	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Livestorm at 23%

Movement

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained10 labels2

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative14 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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 TalentLMS Free or Systeme.io Free to validate your program” Kimi K2 · Customer education · budget prompt · first choice

“Systeme.io (Best Overall for Bootstrapped Startups)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Content marketing · budget prompt · first choice

“Systeme.io provides multiple tools in one affordable package” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Webinars · budget prompt · alternative

“Best if You Need Zero Upfront Cost: Systeme.io” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Customer education · 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 Systeme.io, over the 14 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Systeme.io was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Carrd7 of 143Not in the top three

Leadpages7 of 141Not in the top three

Unbounce6 of 140Not in the top three

MailerLite5 of 142Not in the top three

Swipe Pages5 of 141Not in the top three

ClickFunnels5 of 140Not in the top three

Instapage4 of 140Not in the top three

Landingi3 of 140Not in the top three

WebinarKit2 of 142Not in the top three

TalentLMS2 of 141Not 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.

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 Systeme.io'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 Systeme.io, 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 systemeio.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.