Index › GTM › Marketing › Video ads › Demandbase CTV vs The Trade Desk
Video advertising · November 2026 Edition

Demandbase CTV vs The Trade Desk

Zero of fourteen models named Demandbase CTV first on the direct prompt; zero named The Trade Desk. Demandbase CTV was named by ten of the fourteen models and The Trade Desk by fourteen and Demandbase CTV carries 13 labels and The Trade Desk 31, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Demandbase CTV

accepted challenger

By Demandbase, San Francisco, United States, founded 2006. Named in one category this edition.

The Trade Desk

criticized challenger

By Trade Desk, Ventura, United States, founded 2009. Named in ten categories this edition.

First-choice share4%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%29%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#6#8A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1331A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Demandbase CTV reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.LinkedIn Video Ads was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. LinkedIn Video Ads vs Demandbase CTV · LinkedIn Video Ads vs The Trade Desk · StackAdapt vs Demandbase CTV

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 video advertising page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Demandbase CTVFirst choices, of fourteen modelsThe Trade Desk
Direct004 against The Trade Desk
Paraphrase215 against The Trade Desk
Comparative00
Budget-constrained00
Scale-constrained00
Negative01
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 Demandbase CTV and The Trade Desk stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
Demandbase CTV The Trade Desk first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Demandbase CTV on the left and The Trade Desk on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Demandbase CTV and The Trade Desk stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

6 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Perplexity SonarStackAdapt alternatives: Demandbase CTV, LinkedIn Video Ads, Vibe.co, YouTube Ads
Mistral SmallLinkedIn Video Ads, YouTube Ads alternatives: Demandbase CTV
DeepSeek V4 FlashLinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: Demandbase CTV, StackAdapt, YouTube Ads
Qwen 3.7 FlashLinkedIn Video Ads, YouTube Ads alternatives: Demandbase CTV, Google Display, Meta Ads, StackAdapt, The Trade Desk
GLM 4.7 FlashXLinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: Demandbase CTV, Spotify Ads, StackAdapt, YouTube Ads
MiniMax M2.5LinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: Demandbase CTV, YouTube Ads

Neither was named

8 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5LinkedIn Video Ads, StackAdapt alternatives: Vibe.co, Vidyard, Wistia
GPT-5.4 miniLinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: YouTube Ads
Gemini 3.5 FlashLinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: MNTN, Meta Ads, YouTube Ads
Grok 4.20LinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: YouTube Ads
Llama 4 MaverickStackAdapt
Kimi K2LinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: StackAdapt, Vibe.co, YouTube Ads
GPT-6 LunaLinkedIn Video Ads alternatives: YouTube Ads
Muse Glimmer 30BLinkedIn Video Ads, StackAdapt alternatives: YouTube Ads

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
Level: the same share of first choices.
Demandbase CTV0%#– of 9
The Trade Desk0%#9 of 9
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Demandbase CTV leads by two points.
Demandbase CTV4%#6 of 13
The Trade Desk2%#8 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Demandbase CTV17%#3 of 11
The Trade Desk17%#2 of 11
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Demandbase CTV

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.

“If your priority is account-level targeting and connecting CTV to pipeline, start with Demandbase CTV/Piper.” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: Demandbase CTV” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Best if you're already doing ABM ... Caveat: It's an enterprise-grade platform and may be overkill or cost-prohibitive for some mid-sized companies.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · paraphrase prompt · alternative

What the models said about The Trade Desk

No label in this category carried a quote.

Also compared

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.