GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › UserVoice · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

UserVoice

20Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

10 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

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. UserVoice was named 8 times in Feedback, where Google Forms led with 15%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business38 of 85

under the label threshold

Mid-market36 of 104

under the label threshold

Enterprise19 of 77

under the label threshold

In feedback · 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 UserVoice 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 feedback and surveys	Customer	0%	36 of 104	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by Google Forms at 15%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for UserVoice 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 UserVoice 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	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	0	0	2
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	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	1	2
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

Direct6 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained6 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative20 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.

“if your priority is revenue-weighted prioritization and you have the budget, UserVoice is the superior choice” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Feedback · direct prompt · alternative

“Top Pick: UserVoice ... Best for Product-Led Growth & Roadmap Prioritization” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Feedback · direct prompt · alternative

“Roadmap-driven prioritization / enterprise feedback ops” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Feedback · comparative prompt · alternative

“Perfect if you need a "feedback portal"” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Feedback · scale 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.

“poor at general surveying and analytics” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Feedback · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as UserVoice, over the 20 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and UserVoice was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Qualtrics18 of 207Not in the top three

Medallia15 of 202Not in the top three

SurveyMonkey14 of 204Not in the top three

Typeform13 of 200Not in the top three

Canny12 of 201Not in the top three

Survicate10 of 201Not in the top three

Alchemer6 of 201Not in the top three

Google Forms6 of 200Not in the top three

Pendo6 of 200Not in the top three

AskNicely5 of 200Not 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 UserVoice. 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 5 of the 20 answers that named UserVoice and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

zonkafeedback.com4

getperspective.ai3

qualaroo.com3

typeform.com3

chattermill.com2

deeto.com2

gitnux.org2

greatquestion.co2

guideflow.com2

hellocustomer.com2

Twenty-five of the twenty-five domain citations in answers naming UserVoice came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

getperspective.ai/blog/customer-feedback-management-software-2026-10-platforms-ranked3

typeform.com/blog/customer-feedback-tools3

zonkafeedback.com/blog/customer-feedback-tools3

chattermill.com/blog/best-customer-feedback-tools2

deeto.com/blog-post/customer-feedback-platforms-compared2

greatquestion.co/blog/customer-feedback-tools2

guideflow.com/blog/customer-feedback-tools2

qualaroo.com/blog/enterprise-feedback-management-software2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as UserVoice

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

Productboard / UserVoice 1Uservoice 1

The company

UserVoice.

Website: uservoice.com
Headquarters: San Francisco, United States
Founded: 2008

From Wikidata, fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase

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 UserVoice'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 UserVoice, 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 uservoice.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.