Mobile marketing and push
Asked as “mobile push notification and SMS marketing platform”, and as “push and SMS messaging tool”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B software company. 25 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, six models each.
Standing · first-choice share
48%
Clear leader
48Customer.io16OneSignal12Braze24others
48% of first choices, clear leader.
The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all six models, for a mid-market B2B software company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
Show the four products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
10Firebase Cloud Messaging0%50%12criticized challengernewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
07
Twilio Programmable Messaging0%24%21accepted challengernewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
Twilio Programmable Messaging0%24%21accepted challengernewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.The floor is 12 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 can't be told apart from repeat variation, and both are shown. Each index measures its own floor from its own repeat, over its own categories, so the floor differs from one index to the next. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
All fifteen head-to-head pages: the top six products, each against each
Recommended versus criticized
Every product with at least 10 labels here, on both axes. The 30% line names a quadrant, not the verdict above: that one needs more than 40%.
Criticized challengerCriticized default
Negative label rate →
01
02
03
04
05
0607
08
09F10
Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative60%
Key
01Customer.io48%
Customer.io48%02OneSignal16%
OneSignal16%03Braze12%
Braze12%04Iterable12%
Iterable12%05Pushwoosh8%
Pushwoosh8%06Airship4%
Airship4%07Twilio Programmable Messaging0%
Twilio Programmable Messaging0%08Attentive0%
Attentive0%09Klaviyo0%
Klaviyo0%10Firebase Cloud Messaging0%
What they warned about
Five of six models held their first choice under the paraphrase. Claude Opus 4.8 changed. A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
Pushwoosh50%
5 of 10 labels negative · 5 of 6 models · 2 hard negative
“the clearest case. A Reuters investigation revealed that mobile apps for the U.S. Army and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were integrating software that sends visitor data to a Russian company” Claude Opus 5, negative prompt
Braze33%
8 of 24 labels negative · 5 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“Skip Braze and Iterable unless you're pushing toward enterprise scale.” Claude Opus 5, paraphrase prompt
Firebase Cloud Messaging
50%
6 of 12 labels negative · 4 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“Anything still on FCM legacy APIs... deprecated on June 20, 2023, with shutdown starting July 22, 2024” Claude Opus 5, negative prompt
Twilio Programmable Messaging24%
5 of 21 labels negative · 4 of 6 models
“Twilio's employees were tricked via SMS phishing messages into giving up credentials, leading to customer data being breached” Claude Opus 5, negative prompt
What they cite
Six of the six models returned a source list in this edition: six return the pages they cited.
Sites the answers cite
30 of 36 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 6 of 6 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 553 links across 227 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. None of the 36 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category.
vendor site · OneSignal23 answers · 30 citations · 5 models
vendor site · Courier15 answers · 19 citations · 3 models
vendor site · Pushwoosh12 answers · 14 citations · 6 models
vendor site · Braze10 answers · 10 citations · 3 models
vendor site · Guideflow8 answers · 10 citations · 3 models
vendor site · EngageLab8 answers · 9 citations · 3 models
vendor site · InsiderOne8 answers · 9 citations · 4 models
vendor site · Attentive8 answers · 8 citations · 6 models
8 answers · 8 citations · 3 models
vendor site · Customer.io7 answers · 16 citations · 2 models
vendor site · Twilio7 answers · 9 citations · 3 models
vendor site · Klaviyo7 answers · 7 citations · 4 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
15 answers · 3 models
11 answers · 3 models
8 answers · 3 models
7 answers · 4 models
6 answers · 3 models
6 answers · 3 models
6 answers · 3 models
6 answers · 2 models
5 answers · 2 models
5 answers · 2 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best mobile push notification and sms marketing platform”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days | Best Google position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customer.io customer.io | 48% | 218 | 2,900 | 174 | 15,750 | $6,920 | 112 | |
| OneSignal onesignal.com | 16% | 322 | 4,400 | 133 | 29,726 | 38 | ||
| Braze braze.com | 12% | 540 | 27,100 | 6,395 | 55,552 | $13,112 | 59 | |
| Iterable iterable.com | 12% | 136 | 9,900 | 6,286 | 11,545 | $64,478 | 37 | |
| Pushwoosh pushwoosh.com | 8% | 51 | 170 | 4 | 4,463 | 1 | ||
| Airship airship.com | 4% | 169 | 22,200 | 3,093 | 23,006 | 7 | ||
| Twilio parent site Twilio Programmable Messaging 0% | 0% | 215 | 135,000 | 4,343 | ||||
| Attentive attentive.com | 0% | 182 | 60,500 | 28,825 | 54,310 | $258 | 2 | |
| CleverTap clevertap.com | 0% | 214 | 1,000 | 24 | 20,153 | $12,750 | 20 | |
| Klaviyo klaviyo.com | 0% | 365 | 90,500 | 1,560 | 200,057 | $572 | 20 | 7 |
Google's top ten for the one searches hold 9 sites; 3 of them are among the sites the models cited here (businessofapps.com, courier.com, klaviyo.com). The first result for “best mobile push notification and sms marketing platform” is courier.com.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best mobile push notification and SMS marketing platform for a mid-market B2B software company?”Paraphrase“Which push and SMS messaging tool would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B software company?”Comparative“What are the top mobile push and SMS marketing platforms and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best mobile push notification and SMS marketing platform for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a mobile push notification and SMS marketing platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which mobile push and SMS marketing platforms should I avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Opus 5Customer.ioagainst: Braze, Iterable, KlaviyoCustomer.ioHeldagainst: Braze, IterableBrazeagainst: AWS SNS, Firebase Cloud Messaging, OmnisendOneSignalno first choiceagainst: Adobe Mobile Services, Apex SMS, Firebase Cloud Messaging, Launch SMS, Mobile Drip, Pushwoosh, Textitute, Twilio Notify, Twilio Programmable Messaging
Nine alternatives
Airship, Appcues, Courier, HubSpot Marketing Hub, Intercom, Knock, OneSignal, Pendo, Twilio Programmable MessagingFour alternatives
Courier, Knock, OneSignal, Twilio Programmable MessagingThirteen alternatives
Airship, Attentive, CleverTap, Infobip, Iterable, Klaviyo, MoEngage, OneSignal, Postscript, SimpleTexting, Sinch, SlickText, Twilio Programmable MessagingFour alternatives
Brevo, Firebase Cloud Messaging, Omnisend, PushEngageClaude Opus 4.8Customer.io, IterableCustomer.ioChangedBrazeOneSignalno first choicenothing named
Three alternatives
Braze, OneSignal, Twilio Programmable MessagingThree alternatives
Braze, OneSignal, Twilio Programmable MessagingNine alternatives
Attentive, CleverTap, Firebase Cloud Messaging, Iterable, Klaviyo, MoEngage, OneSignal, Postscript, Twilio Programmable MessagingFive alternatives
Omnisend, PushEngage, SimpleTexting, SlickText, TextedlyGPT-6 AstraCustomer.ioCustomer.ioHeldBraze, Iterableagainst: Postscript, Twilio Programmable MessagingPushwooshAirship, Brazeagainst: Airship, Amazon Pinpoint, Braze, OneSignal, Pushwoosh, Twilio Programmable Messaging
Two alternatives
Braze, OneSignalOne alternative
OneSignalFive alternatives
Airship, Attentive, CleverTap, Klaviyo, OneSignalTwo alternatives
OneSignal, Twilio Programmable MessagingThree alternatives
Customer.io, Iterable, OneSignalGPT-5.6 SolCustomer.ioagainst: Braze, IterableCustomer.ioHeldagainst: BrazeBrazeagainst: Salesforce Marketing CloudPushwooshBraze, Iterableagainst: Adobe Mobile Services, Apple Push Notification service, Firebase Cloud Messaging, Leanplum, OneSignal, Pushwoosh, Twilio Programmable Messaging
One alternative
OneSignalTwo alternatives
Knock, OneSignalSix alternatives
Airship, Attentive, Customer.io, Iterable, Klaviyo, OneSignalThree alternatives
Firebase Cloud Messaging, OneSignal, Twilio Programmable MessagingSix alternatives
Adobe Journey Optimizer, Airship, Customer.io, Klaviyo, OneSignal, Salesforce Marketing CloudGemini 3.1 ProCustomer.ioagainst: Attentive, Klaviyo, Postscript, YotpoCustomer.ioHeldagainst: Brazeno first choiceOneSignalBraze, Iterableagainst: Amazon SNS, Emotive, Firebase Cloud Messaging, Pushwoosh, Twilio Programmable Messaging, Zipwhip
Three alternatives
Braze, Iterable, OneSignalTwo alternatives
OneSignal, Twilio Programmable MessagingFive alternatives
Brevo, Firebase Cloud Messaging, Omnisend, SendPulse, Twilio Programmable MessagingFive alternatives
Airship, Attentive, Klaviyo, OneSignal, Twilio EngagePerplexity Sonar ProCustomer.ioCustomer.ioHeldagainst: BrazeOneSignalOneSignalagainst: Firebase Cloud Messagingno first choiceagainst: Ad-Maven, Airship, Braze, DaoPush, DatsPush, Firebase Cloud Messaging, Iterable, MegaPush, PropellerAds, Pushwoosh, RichAds
Three alternatives
ActiveCampaign, Braze, CourierOne alternative
OneSignalEight alternatives
Airship, Attentive, Braze, CleverTap, Iterable, MoEngage, Pushwoosh, TextedlyTwo alternatives
Courier, SenderBold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency.
Thirty-six rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct recommendation | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 16:38 | yes | 23 | 62 s |
| Direct recommendation | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 16:39 | no | 0 | 19 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 18:50 | yes | 5 | 24 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 18:52 | yes | 7 | 38 s |
| Direct recommendation | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-09 16:41 | no | 0 | 29 s |
| Direct recommendation | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 16:40 | yes | 20 | 8 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 16:43 | yes | 25 | 51 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 16:45 | yes | 26 | 41 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 18:53 | yes | 5 | 22 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 18:54 | yes | 7 | 35 s |
| Paraphrase | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 16:59 | no | 0 | 27 s |
| Paraphrase | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 16:45 | yes | 20 | 5 s |
| Comparative | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 16:49 | yes | 41 | 68 s |
| Comparative | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 16:52 | yes | 35 | 84 s |
| Comparative | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 18:56 | yes | 9 | 42 s |
| Comparative | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 18:59 | yes | 10 | 65 s |
| Comparative | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 17:00 | no | 0 | 24 s |
| Comparative | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 16:53 | yes | 20 | 10 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 16:56 | yes | 31 | 46 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 17:00 | yes | 28 | 217 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 19:01 | yes | 4 | 27 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 19:02 | yes | 4 | 30 s |
| Budget constrained | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 17:02 | yes | 6 | 34 s |
| Budget constrained | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 17:01 | yes | 20 | 7 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 17:05 | yes | 42 | 100 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 17:06 | no | 0 | 28 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 19:04 | yes | 9 | 39 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 19:06 | yes | 10 | 68 s |
| Scale constrained | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 17:03 | no | 0 | 25 s |
| Scale constrained | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 17:06 | yes | 20 | 7 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 17:10 | yes | 44 | 108 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 17:13 | yes | 37 | 48 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 19:08 | yes | 7 | 53 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 19:11 | yes | 8 | 85 s |
| Negative framing | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 17:05 | yes | 10 | 38 s |
| Negative framing | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 17:13 | yes | 20 | 7 s |
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
HubSpot read as HubSpot Marketing Hub
Sinch read as Sinch
Twilio read as Twilio Programmable Messaging
Twilio (Segment + Engage) read as Twilio Programmable Messaging
Twilio (Segment + Programmable Messaging) read as Twilio Programmable Messaging
Twilio (and Twilio Engage) read as Twilio Programmable Messaging
Twilio (with SendGrid / Segment) read as Twilio Programmable Messaging
Unresolved, counted raw
None awaiting human review.
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.