Channel partner and local marketing
Asked as “through-channel marketing platform”, and as “partner marketing and local marketing tool”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B software company. 22 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, six models each.
Standing · first-choice share
18%
Contested · PartnerStack 14%
18Impartner PRM14PartnerStack14Unifyr55others
18% of first choices, contested.
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
03
ZINFI Unified Partner Management14%14%22accepted challengernewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 14% now.
ZINFI Unified Partner Management14%14%22accepted challengernewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 14% now.Show the two products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
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.
Head to head
All ten head-to-head pages: the top five 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
0203
04
05
06
07Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative30%
Key
01Impartner PRM18%
Impartner PRM18%02Unifyr14%
Unifyr14%03ZINFI Unified Partner Management14%
ZINFI Unified Partner Management14%04StructuredWeb5%
StructuredWeb5%05Ansira5%
Ansira5%06Mindmatrix0%
Mindmatrix0%07SproutLoud0%
SproutLoud0%What they warned about
One of six models held their first choice under the paraphrase. Claude Opus 5, Claude Opus 4.8, GPT-6 Astra, Gemini 3.1 Pro and Perplexity Sonar Pro 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.
Impartner PRM28%
8 of 29 labels negative · 5 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“they are Enterprise-grade... they should be avoided on a limited budget.” Gemini 3.1 Pro, budget prompt
Unifyr20%
6 of 30 labels negative · 4 of 6 models · 1 hard negative
“they can cost thousands of dollars per month and require heavy IT implementation... should be avoided on a limited budget” Gemini 3.1 Pro, budget prompt
Mindmatrix21%
5 of 24 labels negative · 4 of 6 models
“Mindmatrix, for example, positions itself as a "Partner Operating System"... Suites can be genuinely good, but the TCMA module is often the weakest leg.” Claude Opus 5, negative prompt
ZINFI Unified Partner Management14%
3 of 22 labels negative · 3 of 6 models
“If you eventually need MDF automation and deep TCMA — ZINFI or Impartner, but treat these as the upgrade path, not the starting point.” Claude Opus 5, budget 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
35 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. 613 links across 212 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.
22 answers · 46 citations · 6 models
vendor site · ZINFI19 answers · 46 citations · 6 models
vendor site · Impartner16 answers · 19 citations · 6 models
vendor site · Unifyr12 answers · 18 citations · 6 models
vendor site · xAmplify12 answers · 17 citations · 4 models
vendor site · JourneyBee12 answers · 15 citations · 3 models
vendor site · Structured9 answers · 14 citations · 4 models
vendor site · Ansira9 answers · 12 citations · 5 models
vendor site · Mindmatrix9 answers · 10 citations · 5 models
vendor site · PartnerPortal.io7 answers · 9 citations · 3 models
vendor site · Monday.com7 answers · 8 citations · 4 models
7 answers · 7 citations · 3 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.
16 answers · 5 models
9 answers · 4 models
6 answers · 4 models
6 answers · 2 models
6 answers · 3 models
5 answers · 2 models
5 answers · 2 models
5 answers · 3 models
5 answers · 3 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 through-channel marketing platform”, “through-channel 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Impartner PRM impartner.com | 18% | 312 | 110 | 1 | 63,020 | 7 | 2 | |
| Unifyr unifyr.com | 14% | 151 | 210 | 2 | 2,877 | 9 | 5 | |
| ZINFI Unified Partner Management zinfi.com | 14% | 237 | 10 | 0 | 70,639 | 3 | ||
| PartnerStack partnerstack.com | 14% | 401 | 4,400 | 68 | 27,495 | 16 | ||
| Kiflo PRM kiflo.com | 9% | 145 | 20 | 0 | 1,941 | $457 | 5 | |
| Structured structured.ai StructuredWeb 5%, Structured 5% | 9% | 43 | 12,100 | 273,655 | 716 | 0 | ||
| Ansira ansira.com | 5% | 49 | 1,900 | 43 | 6,747 | 6 | 1 | |
| Marq Team marq.com | 5% | 27 | 0 | 62,091 | 2 | |||
| Mindmatrix mindmatrix.net Mindmatrix Bridge 5%, Mindmatrix 0% | 5% | 68 | 720 | 5 | 3,681 | 4 | ||
| Brevo brevo.com | 5% | 440 | 40,500 | 327 | 81,741 | $17,847 | 106 |
Google's top ten for the two searches hold 14 sites; 6 of them are among the sites the models cited here (ansira.com, g2.com, impartner.com, unifyr.com, xamplify.com, zinfi.com). The first result for “best through-channel marketing platform” is ansira.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 through-channel marketing platform for a mid-market B2B software company?”Paraphrase“Which partner marketing and local marketing tool would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B software company?”Comparative“What are the top through-channel marketing platforms and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best through-channel marketing platform for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a through-channel marketing platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which through-channel marketing platforms should I avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Opus 5Impartner PRM, Unifyragainst: Channelscaler, Channeltivity, PartnerStackZINFI Unified Partner ManagementChangedagainst: Impartner PRMImpartner PRM, SproutLoudagainst: PartnerStack, Salesforce PRM, impact.comKiflo PRM, PartnerStackagainst: Impartner PRM, ZINFI Unified Partner Managementno first choiceagainst: Mindmatrix
Three alternatives
Mindmatrix Bridge, StructuredWeb, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementThree alternatives
Channelscaler, Mindmatrix PRM/Bridge, PartnerStackSeven alternatives
Ansira, BrandMuscle, CampaignDrive, Mindmatrix, Pica9, Unifyr, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementSeven alternatives
Canva, Channeltivity, Google Drive, HubSpot Marketing Hub, Magentrix PRM, Marq Team, NotionClaude Opus 4.8StructuredWeb, ZINFI Unified Partner Managementagainst: Adobe Marketo Engage, HubSpot Marketing HubPartnerStackChangedagainst: Yextno first choiceZINFI Unified Partner Managementagainst: Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, Unifyrno first choicenothing named
Two alternatives
Impartner PRM, UnifyrSix alternatives
Birdeye, Channelscaler, Crossbeam, Impartner PRM, Uberall, impact.comFour alternatives
Canva, HubSpot Marketing Hub, StructuredWeb, Webinfinity/ChanneltivityGPT-6 AstraUnifyrMindmatrix BridgeChangedAnsira, Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, StructuredWeb, Unifyr, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementxAmplifyagainst: ZINFI Unified Partner Managementno first choiceagainst: Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, SproutLoud, Unifyr
Three alternatives
Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementTwo alternatives
Impartner PRM, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementTwo alternatives
Pica9 CampaignDrive, e2openOne alternative
MindmatrixGPT-5.6 SolImpartner PRMImpartner PRMHeldStructuredMarq Teamagainst: Ansira, Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, Structured, Unifyrno first choiceagainst: Ansira, Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, PartnerStack, Unifyr, ZINFI Unified Partner Management
Three alternatives
Mindmatrix, Structured, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementFive alternatives
Ansira Brand-to-Local, Mindmatrix, SproutLoud, StructuredWeb, UnifyrFive alternatives
Ansira, Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, Unifyr, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementTwo alternatives
Channext, MassetGemini 3.1 ProImpartner PRMStructuredChangedno first choiceKiflo PRMagainst: Ansira, Impartner PRM, Unifyrno first choiceagainst: Adobe Marketo Engage, HubSpot Marketing Hub, Impartner PRM, Klaviyo, Unifyr
Four alternatives
Channelscaler, Mindmatrix, Unifyr, ZINFI Unified Partner ManagementFour alternatives
Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, PartnerStack, UnifyrThree alternatives
Channeltivity, Introw, UnifyrSeven alternatives
Ansira, BrandMuscle, Impartner PRM, Mindmatrix, SproutLoud, Structured, UnifyrPerplexity Sonar ProUnifyrPartnerStackChangedBraze, IterableAnsira, Brevono first choicenothing named
Three alternatives
Channelscaler, Channeltivity, HubSpot Marketing HubThree alternatives
Channelscaler, Channeltivity, Partner FleetNine alternatives
ActiveCampaign, Adobe Marketo Engage, HubSpot Marketing Hub, Klaviyo, Salesforce Marketing Cloud, Salesforce Service Cloud, Skai, StackAdapt, The Trade DeskOne alternative
ActiveCampaignBold 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 20:29 | yes | 34 | 68 s |
| Direct recommendation | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 20:33 | yes | 26 | 56 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 20:35 | yes | 6 | 32 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 20:36 | yes | 3 | 52 s |
| Direct recommendation | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 18:45 | yes | 6 | 40 s |
| Direct recommendation | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 20:33 | yes | 20 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 20:39 | yes | 39 | 67 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 20:41 | yes | 26 | 81 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 20:43 | yes | 4 | 23 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 20:44 | yes | 5 | 41 s |
| Paraphrase | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 18:46 | yes | 12 | 40 s |
| Paraphrase | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 20:42 | yes | 20 | 5 s |
| Comparative | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 20:47 | yes | 41 | 75 s |
| Comparative | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 20:52 | yes | 31 | 56 s |
| Comparative | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 20:55 | yes | 9 | 49 s |
| Comparative | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 20:58 | yes | 8 | 76 s |
| Comparative | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 18:48 | yes | 15 | 39 s |
| Comparative | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 20:53 | yes | 20 | 11 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 21:01 | yes | 41 | 55 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 21:03 | yes | 23 | 41 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 21:05 | yes | 3 | 29 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 21:06 | yes | 3 | 46 s |
| Budget constrained | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 18:50 | yes | 17 | 50 s |
| Budget constrained | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 21:03 | yes | 20 | 6 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 21:08 | yes | 32 | 64 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 21:09 | no | 0 | 21 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 21:11 | yes | 7 | 40 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 21:14 | yes | 3 | 66 s |
| Scale constrained | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 18:51 | yes | 8 | 45 s |
| Scale constrained | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 21:10 | yes | 20 | 8 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Opus 5 | claude-opus-5 | 2026-09-09 21:17 | yes | 36 | 80 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Opus 4.8 | claude-opus-4-8 | 2026-09-09 21:19 | yes | 40 | 54 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-6 Astra | gpt-6-astra | 2026-09-09 21:21 | yes | 4 | 32 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-5.6 Sol | gpt-5.6-sol | 2026-09-09 21:22 | yes | 2 | 38 s |
| Negative framing | Gemini 3.1 Pro | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | 2026-09-10 18:53 | yes | 9 | 30 s |
| Negative framing | Perplexity Sonar Pro | sonar-pro | 2026-09-09 21:19 | yes | 20 | 8 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
Impartner read as Impartner PRM
Kiflo read as Kiflo PRM
Magentrix read as Magentrix PRM
ZINFI read as ZINFI Unified Partner Management
ZINFI UPM read as ZINFI Unified Partner Management
Zinfi read as ZINFI Unified Partner Management
Unresolved, counted raw
None awaiting human review.
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.