AdRoll ABM vs Apollo.io
Twelve of fourteen models named AdRoll ABM first on the direct prompt; zero named Apollo.io. AdRoll ABM was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Apollo.io by eleven and AdRoll ABM carries 67 labels and Apollo.io 12, so the shares are not directly comparable.
By AdRoll, San Francisco, United States, founded 2007. Named in thirteen categories this edition.
San Francisco, United States, founded 2015. Named in twenty-two categories this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the account-based marketing platforms page.
By framing
AdRoll ABMFirst choices, of fourteen modelsApollo.io
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | | ||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | | |
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | | ||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | |||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | | |
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | ||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | |
AdRoll ABM Apollo.io first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, AdRoll ABM on the left and Apollo.io on the right.The direct prompt
AdRoll ABM first, Apollo.io not the choice
12 of 14 modelsApollo.io was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
Apollo.io22%#2 of 12AdRoll ABM17%#3 of 12AdRoll ABM52%#1 of 8Apollo.io10%#3 of 8AdRoll ABM0%#6 of 8Apollo.io0%#– of 8What the models said about AdRoll ABM
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Avoid enterprise tools like Demandbase, 6sense, Terminus, or RollWorks” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · hard negative
“Review summaries note limited native advertising options, inadequate reporting, and targeting/filtering limitations” GPT-5.4 mini · negative prompt · soft negative
“Useful for account-based advertising, but less suitable if your primary need is named-contact intelligence” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“For most mid-market B2B companies, RollWorks is the best starting point due to its accessible pricing, HubSpot native integration, and manageable complexity.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
“Terminus, RollWorks | Great balance of account targeting, display ads, and sales alerts without the extreme operational complexity or high price tag” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
What the models said about Apollo.io
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.
“Best for early-stage ABM teams that need to identify, research, and contact target accounts without spending $50K+ on an enterprise platform” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.