GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › TalkJS · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

TalkJS

8Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative 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. TalkJS 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 business36 of 112

under the label threshold

Mid-market64 of 113

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

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 TalkJS 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	0%	64 of 113	25%	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 TalkJS 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 TalkJS across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	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	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	1	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	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 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Pick Stream/TalkJS/CometChat for fast, pre-built UIs” DeepSeek V4 Flash · In-app messaging · 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.

“Moderate Caution ... No mobile-native SDK ... Very narrow use case” DeepSeek V4 Flash · In-app messaging · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

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

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CometChat7 of 82Not in the top three

Stream7 of 82Not in the top three

Sendbird6 of 80Not in the top three

Intercom5 of 81Not in the top three

Userpilot5 of 81Not in the top three

Appcues5 of 80Not in the top three

Chameleon4 of 80Not in the top three

Crisp3 of 82Not in the top three

MirrorFly3 of 80Not in the top three

PubNub3 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.

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 TalkJS'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 TalkJS, 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 talkjs.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.