Twelve of fourteen models named Loopio first on the direct prompt; zero named AutoRFP.ai. Loopio was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and AutoRFP.ai by ten and Loopio carries 64 labels and AutoRFP.ai 21, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in three categories this edition.
Named in 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 RFP response software page.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Loopio and AutoRFP.ai were named in the same answer seventy-nine times, of the 273 answers naming Loopio and the 86 naming AutoRFP.ai. In those answers AutoRFP.ai took the first choice fifteen times and Loopio twenty-two.
| 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 |
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.
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“What to Avoid ... Loopio ... often require custom quotes typically ranging from $15,000 to $25,000+ per year” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid (Unless Budget Allows Later): Loopio | Requires a custom quote; ... still enterprise-oriented.” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise tools like Responsive (formerly RFPIO), Loopio, or full AutoRFP.ai” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Loopio — Often the top-rated for mid-market. Excellent content library, strong AI suggestions, clean collaboration, great Salesforce integration.” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · first choice
“Prefer specialized RFP response platforms ... (e.g., Responsive/formerly RFPIO, Loopio, or alternatives like RocketDocs, Tribble, or AutoRFP.ai)” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · first choice
“the two names that consistently top the lists for RFP response / Strategic Response Management are Responsive, formerly RFPIO, and Loopio” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid enterprise tools like Responsive (formerly RFPIO), Loopio, or full AutoRFP.ai” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“often heavy on marketing claims, but users report it struggles with complex, multi-format compliance matrices” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“pricing is reportedly about $899/month, so it is less suitable for a tight budget” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · soft negative
“AutoRFP.ai offers flexible, transparent pricing and project-based plans suitable for variable workloads” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Choose AutoRFP.ai or Inventive AI when speed and low implementation effort matter more than deep governance.” Perplexity Sonar · comparative prompt · alternative
“AutoRFP.ai and Inventive AI are the strongest starting points because they are fast, affordable, and easy to run” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · alternative
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.