3 categories · RankedLoopio
Loopio is RFP response software built on AI, for teams that respond to RFPs, RFIs, DDQs, and security questionnaires · loopio.com ↗
Strongest at mid-market, contested with PandaDoc. Ranked 5 of 79 for small business buyers.
The standing depends on who is buying. Every model is asked the same questions for each company size.
PandaDoc is first at 30%.
Ranked first, contested: PandaDoc has 20%. 12 of 14 models made it the first choice when asked directly.
Responsive is first at 60%.
Why models recommend it
“Loopio — Often the top-rated for mid-market. Excellent content library, strong AI suggestions, clean collaboration, great Salesforce integration.”Grok 4.20 · Scale-constrained question · 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 question · 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 question · first choice
“1. Loopio ⭐ 4.6/5 - Best for: Mid-market to enterprise companies handling high volumes of RFPs, DDQs, and security questionnaires”GLM 4.7 FlashX · Comparative question · first choice
What gives them pause
“What to Avoid ... Loopio ... often require custom quotes typically ranging from $15,000 to $25,000+ per year”Qwen 3.7 Flash · Budget-constrained question · warning
“Avoid (Unless Budget Allows Later): Loopio | Requires a custom quote; ... still enterprise-oriented.”Kimi K2 · Budget-constrained question · warning
“Avoid enterprise tools like Responsive (formerly RFPIO), Loopio, or full AutoRFP.ai”Grok 4.20 · Budget-constrained question · warning
“Avoid enterprise platforms such as Responsive, Loopio, or Qvidian”Perplexity Sonar · Budget-constrained question · warning
Also on the shortlist
The products named in the same answers as Loopio, over the 273 answers that named it, and how often each was the first choice instead.
| Product | Named together | Picked instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 217 | 47 | Compare → | |
| 149 | 50 | Compare → | |
| 106 | 4 | View → | |
| 100 | 1 | Compare → | |
| 79 | 15 | Compare → | |
| 70 | 1 | View → | |
| 49 | 13 | Compare → | |
| 44 | 2 | View → | |
| 43 | 0 | View → | |
| 34 | 11 | Compare → |
What the models named instead of Loopio →
A side-by-side page exists where both products are among a category's top eight.
At a glance
Stated on Loopio's own site, not checked by Gane.
- For
- teams responsible for responding to RFPs, RFIs, DDQs, and security questionnaires
- Price stated
- starting with our Foundations tier, which includes 10 seats; Enhanced or Enterprise package
- Integrations
- 275 · 80 (its own pages disagree)
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type II, SOC 1, SOC 3, GDPR, CCPA, ISO 27001
- Customers named
- Zendesk, DocuSign, Allied Universal, HubSpot, Celonis, Alight, SimCorp, Netskope
How this is measured
Fourteen AI models from 12 labs are asked the same buying questions six ways, for three company sizes. Standings refresh every edition.
Gane sells AI visibility software. No company can pay to change a result.
Read the method →Sources returned with these answers
Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted. These counts come from 250 of the 273 answers that named Loopio and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
681 of the 757 domain citations in answers naming Loopio came from a third party's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Warning | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 8 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| Grok 4.20 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 9 |
| Mistral Small | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 9 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 9 |
| Kimi K2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 6 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 |
What it publishes
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 167 | 14 | 2026-09-28 | Proposals | |
| Comparison | 17 | 3 | 2026-08-21 | ||
| Case study | 13 | 0 | 2026-01-15 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 3 | 2 | 2026-09-15 | ||
| Conference or event | 3 | 0 | 2025-09-12 | ||
| Template or tool | 2 | 0 | 2026-03-19 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 2 | 0 | 2026-01-26 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-28Investment management rfp blog
- 2026-09-17Best ddq software private equity blog
- 2026-09-15Go no go decision blog
- 2026-09-15Mcp webinar webinar or virtual event
- 2026-09-03Increase win rate blog
- 2026-09-02Best ai software rfp responses blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page loopio.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.