AI Indexes
GTM AI Index
Index › Products › Usercentrics CMP · October 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

Usercentrics CMP

112Judge labels
9First choices
20Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
8% in Consent for mid-market buyers
Rank 4 of 52 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
4 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 7% of its 42 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Usercentrics CMP →
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In consent · 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 Usercentrics CMP 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
Consent and privacy managementGTM data and infrastructure8%4 of 527%42accepted challenger▲+5Since September 2026: 4% → 9%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

Movement

Since September 2026, Usercentrics CMP held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.

Best category · Consent · by segment

Small business=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 10 of 38, unchanged
Mid-market▲+5Since September 2026: 4% → 9%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
9%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 7 → 4 of 45
Enterprise▼−2Since September 2026: 6% → 4%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 6% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 3 → 5 of 40

All categories · Mid-market

CategorySeptember 2026NowChangeReadingRank
Consent4%9%▲+5Since September 2026: 4% → 9%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Within noiseRank 7 → 4 of 52

Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.

The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions

By model

How each model treated Usercentrics CMP across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.502002
GPT-5.4 mini10102
Gemini 3.5 Flash02002
Perplexity Sonar02103
Grok 4.2012115
Mistral Small01102
DeepSeek V4 Flash10225
Llama 4 Maverick00202
Qwen 3.7 Flash12003
Kimi K204105
GLM 4.7 FlashX02002
MiniMax M2.502103
GPT-6 Luna03003
Muse Glimmer 30B12003

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
Direct25 labels5
Paraphrase18 labels1
Comparative29 labels2not counted in share
Budget-constrained13 labels2
Scale-constrained14 labels1
Negative13 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative112 labels in all, every segment counted; 9 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.

“Usercentrics — Best Overall for EU-Facing B2B ... the sweet spot for mid-market companies where EU compliance is a primary driver.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Consent · direct prompt · first choice
“1. Usercentrics (Best Overall Flexibility) ... Start a trial with Usercentrics if you have developers involved in the stack.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Consent · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose Usercentrics/Cookiebot for automated scanning and strong TCF/Consent Mode v2 with app parity.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Consent · comparative prompt · first choice
“If you want one answer for a mid-market B2B company, I'd start with Usercentrics CMP.” GPT-5.4 mini · Consent · direct 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.

“Usercentrics (standalone): Starts around $50–100/month. Overkill for a small business.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Consent · budget prompt · hard negative
“mention annoying experiences and frustration, particularly around enterprise pricing and configuration complexity” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Consent · negative prompt · soft negative
“Third-party-hosted banners (common in OneTrust, Cookiebot, Usercentrics) blocked by ad-blockers” Grok 4.20 · Consent · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Usercentrics CMP, over the 112 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Usercentrics CMP was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
OneTrust91 of 11230Not among the top eight
Osano69 of 11213Compare →
TrustArc50 of 1123Not among the top eight
Didomi40 of 1121Not among the top eight
iubenda27 of 1123Not among the top eight
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 Usercentrics CMP. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 106 of the 112 answers that named Usercentrics CMP and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

usercentrics.comYour site77
enzuzo.com66
osano.com65
g2.com50
consently.net46
designrush.com45
learn.g2.com40
secureprivacy.ai33
ketch.com32
cookie-script.com28

405 of the 482 domain citations in answers naming Usercentrics CMP came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

usercentrics.com ranks 6 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Usercentrics CMP takes 8% of first choices and Osano takes 31%.
ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates
Position for “consent management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best consent management platform”
6
Searches for its name, Google
30 a month (“usercentrics cmp”)
AI search demand for its name, est.
0 a month
Organic visits to its site
about 67,472 a month
Searches its site ranks for
7,627 · 678 in the top three
Sites linking to it
60,562
Paid Google search
3 searches its ads show for, about 14 clicks and $494 a month (estimate)
Ads on GoogleDetailLess
109+ ads · 50 text, 47 video, 12 image · 36 shown in the last 30 days

First shown May 2022, as Usercentrics GmbH, verified. Ads started 2025-10 to 2026-09: 66 in the year, 43 before. 11 more by other advertisers linking to it.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition
Share of first choices
8%
rank 4 of 52 in consent
Segment leader
31%
Osano
First choices
9 across its categories
Named in
112 answers
Its own site cited
in 106 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

What it publishes

ShowHide
Addresses on usercentrics.com
2,267
subdomains included
Content
535
counted in the table below
Documentation
1
Product · Integration
0 · 11
KindPagesLast 90 days2025-10 to 2026-09LatestCategories named
Report or ebook15002025-11-10Tag management, Mobile apps
Blog12442026-09-25Consent, SEO
News or press7222026-08-27
Conference or event6502025-10-10Mobile apps
Template or tool4432026-08-24
Case study3712026-07-31
Comparison2202026-02-19
Glossary or explainer1212026-09-15
Webinar or virtual event702025-03-04
Podcast or video2undated

Most recent

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page usercentrics.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.

Names read as Usercentrics CMP

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Usercentrics CMP; a claim can dispute any of them.
Usercentrics 36Usercentrics (including Cookiebot) 1Usercentrics (standalone) 1Usercentrics / Cookiebot 1Usercentrics / Cookiebot (by Usercentrics) 1Usercentrics / Cookiebot by Usercentrics 1

Follow Usercentrics CMP

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

The company

Usercentrics CMP is its own company.
ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked
Positioning
Consent Management Platform (CMP)
For
SMBs and growing businesses
Price stated
€7 / month, €15 / month, €30 / month, €50 / month, Custom Pricing €49 / month usercentrics.com/pricing
Starting price
€0 / month usercentrics.com/pricing
Free plan or trial
Start free; No credit card required usercentrics.com
Certifications
SOC 2 Type 2 CompliantHIPAA CompliantProficertISO 27001 CertifiedWCAG 2.2 AA Accessibility CertifiedIAB TCF v2.3 Certified CMPGoogle Certified CMPISO 27001:2022
Hosting
195 countriesGermany
Customers named
Gilson Inc.ONEAMBOSSClarksTerranovaSBLY MediaYOIMEDIAPiKoYa
Not stated on the pages read
Integrations

What Usercentrics CMP's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: usercentrics.com, usercentrics.com/pricing, trust.usercentrics.com, usercentrics.com/customer-stories, usercentrics.com/integrations. A claimed page can correct any of 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 Usercentrics CMP'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 Usercentrics CMP, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Usercentrics CMP by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

  • where Usercentrics CMP is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
  • the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
  • its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
  • who was chosen in the answers that did not name Usercentrics CMP, and every reason the record gives;
  • a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
  • one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.
The subscriber app

A verification link goes to your work email; an address at usercentrics.com is approved on the spot, any other is reviewed by hand. Your email is never published. Claiming gives no say over labels, shares, verdicts or which quotes appear.