Every category where a model named Vibe.co 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
Video advertising	Marketing	7%	5 of 121	0%	28	accepted challenger
Programmatic and display advertising	Marketing	0%	15 of 96	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by StackAdapt at 61%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	2	1	0	3
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	4	2	7
Perplexity Sonar	0	4	0	4
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	3	1	4
Mistral Small	0	1	1	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	3	2	5
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	2	3
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	3	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	1	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	0	1

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

Direct13 labels1

Paraphrase13 labels7

Comparative29 labels9not counted in share

Budget-constrained22 labels4

Scale-constrained8 labels1

Negative2 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative87 labels in all, every segment counted; 13 of the 23 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.

“My strong recommendation: Start with Vibe.co for its B2B-specific features, account-based targeting capabilities, and mid-market pricing.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Video ads · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Vibe.co is the top-rated self-serve option — 100% direct premium inventory, campaigns from $50/day, and built-in incrementality measurement.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Video ads · comparative prompt · first choice

“The Best for Pure Self-Serve & Low Budgets: Vibe.co ... is an outstanding entry point.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Video ads · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“## Best Overall Option: Vibe.co” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Video ads · paraphrase 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Vibe.co, over the 87 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Vibe.co was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

StackAdapt55 of 8710Not in the top three

The Trade Desk44 of 873Not in the top three

YouTube Ads35 of 8712Not in the top three

MNTN35 of 871Not in the top three

Meta Ads28 of 877Not in the top three

TikTok Ads28 of 875Not in the top three

Amazon DSP20 of 870Not in the top three

Google Display & Video 36018 of 873Not in the top three

Basis16 of 870Not in the top three

Simpli.fi16 of 870Not 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 Vibe.co. 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 17 of the 87 answers that named Vibe.co and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

vibe.co17

demandbase.com10

learn.g2.com8

richads.com8

atlassian.com7

indiemedia.club7

madgicx.com7

slashdot.org7

adwave.com6

g2.com6

Eighty-three of the eighty-three domain citations in answers naming Vibe.co came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

vibe.co/blog/how-to/video-advertising-platforms15

demandbase.com/blog/best-ctv-advertising-platforms10

learn.g2.com/best-video-advertising-tools8

atlassian.com/blog/loom/video-marketing-platform7

indiemedia.club/tools/best-video-advertising-networks7

madgicx.com/blog/ad-tech-platform-for-video-advertising7

richads.com/blog/best-video-ad-networks7

vibe.co/blog/how-to/programmatic-video-advertising-platforms7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Vibe.co

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

Vibe 7Vibe.co (CTV) 1

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 Vibe.co'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 Vibe.co, 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 vibecoder.me 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.