Review and reputation management · November 2026 Edition
REVIEWS.io vs Reputation
Zero of fourteen models named REVIEWS.io first on the direct prompt; one named Reputation. REVIEWS.io was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Reputation by thirteen and REVIEWS.io carries 14 labels and Reputation 33, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
By Reputation.com, Redwood City, United States, founded 2006. Named in four categories this edition.
First-choice share6%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate7%24%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels1433A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, REVIEWS.io reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Reviewflowz was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. Birdeye vs REVIEWS.io · Birdeye vs Reputation · Reviewflowz vs REVIEWS.io
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 review and reputation management page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
REVIEWS.ioFirst choices, of fourteen modelsReputation
Direct011 against Reputation
Paraphrase011 against Reputation
Comparative011 against REVIEWS.io · 1 against Reputation
Budget-constrained302 against Reputation
Scale-constrained00
Negative003 against Reputation
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where REVIEWS.io and Reputation stood in it.
| 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 | | | |
REVIEWS.io Reputation first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, REVIEWS.io on the left and Reputation on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where REVIEWS.io and Reputation stood in it.
Reputation first, REVIEWS.io not the choice
1 of 14 modelsREVIEWS.io was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GLM 4.7 FlashXReputation alternatives: Birdeye, Feefo, ReputationStacker
Neither was the first choice, one was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniBirdeye alternatives: G2 Buyer Intent, Reputation, ReviewTrackers
MiniMax M2.5G2 Buyer Intent, Trustpilot alternatives: Birdeye, Reputation, Reviewflowz
Muse Glimmer 30BTrustpilot alternatives: Birdeye, Podium, Reputation, Reviewflowz
Neither was named
10 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Reviewflowz alternatives: TrustRadius
Gemini 3.5 FlashG2 Buyer Intent alternatives: Base, Clutch, Influitive, ReviewTrackers, Reviewflowz, Trustpilot, UserEvidence
Perplexity SonarReviewflowz alternatives: Birdeye
Grok 4.20Trustpilot alternatives: Birdeye, Reviewflowz
Mistral SmallReviewflowz, Trustpilot alternatives: Birdeye
DeepSeek V4 FlashG2 Marketing Solutions alternatives: Birdeye, Gartner Peer Insights, Reviewflowz, TrustRadius
Llama 4 MaverickReviewflowz alternatives: Podium, Trustpilot
Qwen 3.7 FlashTrustpilot alternatives: Birdeye, Influitive, ReviewInc, UserEvidence
Kimi K2Birdeye alternatives: G2 Marketing Solutions, Reviewflowz
GPT-6 LunaReviewflowz alternatives: G2 Marketing Solutions
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
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
REVIEWS.io leads by nine points.
REVIEWS.io9%#3 of 15Reputation0%#15 of 15Mid-marketThe figures above
REVIEWS.io leads by two points.
REVIEWS.io6%#5 of 12Reputation4%#6 of 12Enterprise
The order flips: Reputation leads at enterprise.
Reputation25%#2 of 8REVIEWS.io0%#– of 8What the models said about REVIEWS.io
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“They aren't direct substitutes for a local business review inbox.” GPT-6 Luna · comparative prompt · soft negative
“Reviews.io stands out as the best online review management platform for companies with a limited budget” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · first choice
“REVIEWS.io is the strongest overall choice if you sell online: plans start at about $29/month” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice
“If you run an online shop: Go with REVIEWS.io.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Reputation
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Frequent complaints about false promises, skewed algorithms ... Trustpilot scores around 3.3/5 with many calling it a "scam"” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Enterprise-focused tools like Yotpo, Reputation.com, or Grade.us can exceed $100\u2013500+/month quickly.” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“dominate advertising, they typically cost $250 to $500+ per month with locked-in annual contracts” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“If your priority is B2B-specific monitoring, social listening and turning feedback into operational insight, Reputation.com is the most explicitly B2B-tuned option.” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Choose Birdeye or Reputation.com if you're an enterprise managing hundreds of locations” Kimi K2 · comparative prompt · first choice
“Reputation.com is the safest, most robust choice for mid-market B2B” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Birdeye vs REVIEWS.ioBirdeye vs ReputationReviewflowz vs REVIEWS.ioReviewflowz vs ReputationBrand24 vs REVIEWS.ioBrand24 vs ReputationTrustpilot vs REVIEWS.ioTrustpilot vs ReputationREVIEWS.io vs ReviewTrackersREVIEWS.io vs BrightLocalReputation vs ReviewTrackersReputation vs BrightLocalAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full reviews standing
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.