Index › Products › Apollo.io · October 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Apollo.io

8Judge labels

1First choices

0Negative labels

6 / 14Models named it

2Categories

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Apollo.io was named 4 times in Enterprise AI and 1 other category, where ChatGPT led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business79 of 118

under the label threshold

Mid-market38 of 145

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In enterprise ai · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Apollo.io for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant	Since September 2026
Enterprise AI assistants	Data platform	0%	38 of 145	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by ChatGPT at 25%
Data quality and observability	Data platform	0%	40 of 110	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Metaplane at 31%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Apollo.io yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Apollo.io across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct4 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labels1

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Apollo.io (or similar) as the *data source* hygiene tool” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Data observability · paraphrase prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Apollo.io, over the 8 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Apollo.io was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Gong4 of 80Not among the top eight

Microsoft 365 Copilot3 of 82Not among the top eight

Clay3 of 80Not among the top eight

Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud3 of 80Not among the top eight

ChatGPT2 of 81Not among the top eight

Insycle2 of 81Not among the top eight

Ataccama ONE2 of 80Not among the top eight

Great Expectations2 of 80Not among the top eight

HubSpot Breeze AI2 of 80Not among the top eight

Intercom Fin2 of 80Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Apollo.io. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 7 of the 8 answers that named Apollo.io and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com6

monday.com4

resources.rework.com4

getvoip.com3

prezent.ai3

slite.com3

articsledge.com2

blog.hubspot.com2

brightdata.com2

brocoders.com2

No domain is on file for Apollo.io, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

resources.rework.com/tools/ai-tools/best-ai-tools-for-b2b-20264

g2.com/best-software-companies/2024/top-ai3

getvoip.com/blog/ai-sales-assistants3

monday.com/blog/crm-and-sales/enterprise-ai-tools-for-b2b-sales-workflows3

prezent.ai/blog/best-b2b-ai-tools3

slite.com/learn/ai-assistants-for-business3

articsledge.com/post/ai-tools-b2b-marketing2

brightdata.com/blog/web-data/best-b2b-data-providers2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Apollo.io stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 33,100 a month (“apollo.io”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 396 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 38 of 145 in Enterprise AI

Segment leader

25%

ChatGPT

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 8 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

Follow Apollo.io

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Apollo.io's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Apollo.io, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Apollo.io by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Apollo.io is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name Apollo.io, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.