Today I shared my first GTM Tech Rankings. As a free member, you get full access here.

If you like this direction, like or comment on LinkedIn here (helps it spread).

In this post I’ll talk about the methodology, why I built this, and where it’s heading.

In my career studying GTM tech, here's how I see the main sources.

That's why I'm building a different kind of analyst "firm" (just me) for GTM tech.

This newsletter is a big part. But it's also a research system that I've been building slowly over the last several months. That system is what powers my content and resources today — it’s how I find interesting job posts, track changing in vendor strategy & positioning, and identify the big themes in the space.

Going forward I plan to expose more of the data and system to both you and your agents.

The first piece is live today: GTM Tech Rankings. ~700 products, researched, ranked, and mapped. Not a static PDF. It’s continuously updating and evolution.

The rankings don’t try to say what's "best."

Unlike the lagging rankings from Gartner and G2, Panel Mindshare is a leading indicator. It tracks which products are gaining real attention among the people who get it. I developed it specifically with this purpose.

Under the hood, it's 3,500+ sources I hand-picked for trust and relevance. Operators, builders, execs, the most thoughtful creators. I track every product mention across 70,000+ pieces of content and weight it by engagement. Vendors' own promos don't count.

Want the full mechanic — how mentions get weighted, normalized, and turned into a 0–99 score? Here's the methodology.

Here's the top of the board today:

Here, a coding agent is #1 and a data orchestration tool is #2 — with the incumbents trailing them. That inversion is the whole point of a leading indicator.

And it moves. Codex climbed 12 points last quarter, gaining on Claude Code. Profound is surging in AEO (+14). A PDF wouldn't tell you any of that until it was old news.

While the ranking is system-driven, my judgement is intentionally baked in. I'm the chief curator. I choose the panel and the frameworks, then the system ranks and researches. I can't put a thumb on the scale.

So, can you trust it?

That cuts both ways. If you think I'm a clown, don't trust it. Go ask Claude for the consensus. If you think I've got a decent read on this space, take a look.

I've spent two decades as a founder and operator in GTM. My curiosity is the sole driver of this work.

I've been tinkering with this for a while. First the AI GTM 100. Then the GTM Developer Tools project. And now I've got a framework and ranking system that I think can be a foundational part of my research going forward.

It's still a work in progress. Coverage keeps growing, the frameworks keep sharpening, and the scores refresh nightly. Which means the gaps matter to me.

If you're building something in GTM tech that I'm not covering (or covering wrong), add it here. And tell me what you hate about my frameworks. I love finding the gaps.