IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › GoTo Webinar · September 2026 Edition

GoTo · 1 category · Named, not ranked

GoTo Webinar

2Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

2 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. GoTo Webinar was named 2 times in Streaming, where Confluent Cloud led with 32%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market24 of 78

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In streaming · 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 GoTo Webinar 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
Streaming platforms	Data platform	0%	24 of 78	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Confluent Cloud at 32%

Movement

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

By model

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

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	0	0
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	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“reliability-leaning pick for mid-market SaaS webinar teams” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Streaming · direct 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 GoTo Webinar, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GoTo Webinar was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Redpanda2 of 22Not in the top three

Confluent Cloud2 of 21Not in the top three

Aiven for Apache Kafka2 of 20Not in the top three

Apache Kafka2 of 20Not in the top three

ON242 of 20Not in the top three

Amazon MSK1 of 20Not in the top three

Apache Pulsar1 of 20Not in the top three

Bizzabo1 of 20Not in the top three

Dacast1 of 20Not in the top three

Goldcast1 of 20Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 GoTo Webinar. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 2 of the 2 answers that named GoTo Webinar and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

aimers.io2

confluent.io2

cotocus.com2

dacast.com2

marketful.com2

modern-datatools.com2

owebest.com2

redpanda.com2

aitoolsforbusiness.ai1

automq.com1

Eighteen of the eighteen domain citations in answers naming GoTo Webinar came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

aimers.io/blog/11-saas-webinar-platforms-for-lead-generation2

confluent.io/compare/redpanda-vs-kafka-vs-confluent2

cotocus.com/blog/top-10-event-streaming-platforms-features-pros-cons-comparison2

dacast.com/blog/enterprises-video-platform2

marketful.com/best-virtual-event-platforms2

modern-datatools.com/compare/kafka-vs-confluent-vs-redpanda2

owebest.com/blog/enterprise-streaming-platforms2

aitoolsforbusiness.ai/hive-streaming1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 GoTo Webinar'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 GoTo Webinar, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at goto.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.