The Quick Verdict: AI Assistants Lean Toward Brevo
On June 4, 2026, AI assistants collectively named Brevo far more often than GetResponse when responding to 320 measured email marketing questions. Brevo appeared in 41% of all responses. GetResponse, by contrast, was cited in 11% of answers. This significant gap reveals a clear preference across the surveyed models. These AI assistants—Cohere, Perplexity, Mistral, Claude, ChatGPT, DeepSeek, Grok, and Gemini—draw their information from vast datasets. Their recommendations reflect patterns, prominence, and associations found within their training data. A tool's frequent appearance suggests its strong digital footprint and common association with email marketing solutions across the internet.
The overall data points to Brevo as a more frequently suggested option for a broad range of email marketing inquiries. This doesn't necessarily mean one platform is inherently 'better,' but rather that one is more commonly referenced by these AI models when users ask about email marketing. The difference is substantial, indicating a market perception or content emphasis that favors Brevo in the aggregate. Its 41% share suggests a widespread recognition. GetResponse, while present, shows up less often. Its 11% share suggests a recognized but less dominant presence within the digital information landscape these assistants process. This baseline understanding is crucial for interpreting individual assistant behaviors and their unique biases. A user seeking general recommendations from AI is more likely to encounter Brevo first.
This aggregate view provides a high-level snapshot. It tells us which tool has more digital 'mindshare' among the data sources AI models consume. For businesses or individuals researching email marketing solutions, this initial preference from AI assistants can shape their early exploration. It highlights the general visibility of each platform in the broader digital discourse. The overall trend is clear: Brevo holds a significant lead in AI assistant recommendations for email marketing as of the measurement date.
How AI Assistants Choose: A Closer Look at Preferences
Brevo's 41% overall share against GetResponse's 11% isn't uniform across all AI assistants. Each model exhibits distinct preferences, likely shaped by the specific content and weighting within its training data. Cohere, for instance, showed a particularly strong lean, naming Brevo in 68% of its responses. GetResponse appeared in only 13% of Cohere's answers. This suggests Cohere's data emphasizes Brevo heavily, perhaps reflecting its broader market presence or more frequent discussion in Cohere's training corpus.
Perplexity and Mistral also demonstrated a clear preference for Brevo, each citing it in 53% of questions. GetResponse earned 20% of Perplexity's recommendations and 13% from Mistral. These figures indicate a consistent trend among several AI models. Claude, another assistant, mirrored this strong inclination, mentioning Brevo in 50% of its responses. GetResponse received only 5% of Claude's suggestions. Such disparities show how varied AI models can be in their interpretations of market relevance.
The varying degrees of preference likely stem from the vast and diverse datasets used to train these AI assistants. Some models might have greater exposure to industry reports, product comparisons, or user reviews that highlight Brevo more prominently. Others might prioritize different aspects of the email marketing market. These underlying data biases contribute directly to the observed differences in recommendation patterns. It's not a unified front, but a collection of individual perspectives derived from their unique information pools.
Where the Assistants Disagree: Per-Assistant Divergence
The AI assistants displayed considerable divergence in their preferences for Brevo versus GetResponse. Cohere showed the most pronounced favoritism toward Brevo, naming it in 68% of responses compared to GetResponse's 13%. This suggests Cohere's training data heavily emphasizes Brevo's relevance in email marketing discussions. Perplexity and Mistral also strongly favored Brevo, both citing it in 53% of questions. Perplexity gave GetResponse 20% of its mentions, while Mistral gave it 13%. Their inclinations are clear.
Claude also presented a strong preference for Brevo, naming it in 50% of its answers. GetResponse received a mere 5% of Claude's recommendations. This marks one of the widest gaps among the assistants. ChatGPT, however, offered a comparatively more balanced, though still Brevo-leaning, perspective. It mentioned Brevo 38% of the time and GetResponse 25%. While Brevo still held the lead, ChatGPT's gap was notably narrower than others. This might reflect a broader, less biased training set.
DeepSeek and Grok showed lower overall mention rates for both tools but still favored Brevo. DeepSeek cited Brevo in 30% of its responses against GetResponse's 8%. Grok, with the lowest overall mentions for GetResponse, named Brevo 25% of the time and GetResponse just 3%. Gemini exhibited the lowest recommendation rates for both platforms, mentioning Brevo in 10% of cases and GetResponse in 3%. These figures illustrate that even among assistants, the perceived prominence of these tools can vary significantly, reflecting different data ingestions and processing methodologies.
What Each Is Cited For: Inferring Use Cases
Brevo's higher overall citation rate, at 41%, suggests it's broadly recommended across a spectrum of common email marketing needs. Given its frequent appearance, it's plausible AI assistants suggest Brevo for general inquiries like "What are the top email marketing platforms for small businesses?" or for specific feature sets such as "solid automation features." Its prominence implies it's often associated with comprehensive solutions that integrate well with "e-commerce platforms," a frequent buyer question. The AI's responses likely reflect Brevo's widespread market presence and its reputation for versatility.
GetResponse, with its 11% share, still appears for certain contexts. While less frequently named, its consistent presence implies it's recognized for particular strengths. It might be cited when users inquire about "email marketing tools for lead nurturing" or for the needs of an "agency with multiple clients." Its mentions could also stem from questions around "good reporting and analytics" or "advanced segmentation." AI models likely associate GetResponse with these specific capabilities where it has established market recognition.
The buyer questions provide a framework for understanding these recommendations. When a user asks for a solution for a "non-technical founder," Brevo's higher visibility could mean it's often presented as a user-friendly option. Conversely, if GetResponse is mentioned, it might be for its perceived ease of use for specific tasks. The data doesn't specify why each is named, but the aggregate numbers, combined with typical buyer inquiries, allow for reasonable inferences about their perceived strengths in the digital information landscape.
How a Buyer Should Choose: Beyond AI Recommendations
The AI assistant data offers a valuable starting point, highlighting Brevo's higher general visibility. However, a buyer's ultimate choice should always hinge on specific business needs, not just AI-driven popularity. For instance, if a buyer is looking for "email marketing tools that integrate well with e-commerce platforms," Brevo's higher mention rate suggests it might be a commonly recommended option. But GetResponse could still be a better fit depending on the specific e-commerce platform in question.
Consider the nuances of your own requirements. A "non-technical founder" might prioritize a different user interface than an "agency with multiple clients." While AI might point to Brevo more often, a detailed comparison of features, pricing, and support is essential. If "solid automation features" are paramount, both tools likely offer them, but the depth and flexibility of those features can vary significantly. The AI's recommendations provide a list of popular contenders, not a personalized solution.
Buyers should use the AI data as a filter, not a final decision-maker. If an AI assistant frequently names a tool, it indicates strong market presence and a high probability of meeting general needs. However, for specialized requirements like "advanced segmentation" or specific "lead nurturing" strategies, direct research into each platform's capabilities is crucial. The AI models reflect their training data; your business reflects unique operational demands.