The CRM Duopoly Controls 61% of AI Mentions - But One Leader Wins, One Just Shows Up
Salesforce gets mentioned first 41% of the time. It still loses.

David Andersen
Co-Founder & CTO
- 1Salesforce & HubSpot control 61% of AI mentions combined
- 2Salesforce leads visibility but HubSpot wins 57% of head-to-heads
- 3Zoho CRM achieves near-parity in direct comparisons despite 4% visibility
- 4AI has partitioned the market by company size automatically
Two Brands Own the Conversation
Ask AI for a CRM recommendation and you'll hear Salesforce and HubSpot. But here's what the visibility numbers hide: these two aren't really competing. AI has partitioned them into separate segments - and when they do go head-to-head, only one wins.
Salesforce gets mentioned first twice as often as HubSpot. But when AI platforms actually compare them? HubSpot wins 57% of direct matchups.
One dominates visibility. One dominates recommendations.
The "Powerful, But..." Problem
Every Salesforce mention in our analysis came with a qualifier:
- "Powerful, but expensive..."
- "Scalable, but complex..."
- "Best for enterprise, not SMBs..."
Salesforce carries a 35% negative sentiment rate - the highest of any major CRM. AI platforms have learned its trade-offs and surface them automatically.
HubSpot's mentions come cleaner. When AI recommends it for SMBs or ease-of-use, the caveats are lighter: "easy to start, but costs scale" - a softer objection than "complex and expensive."
Softer "but" = higher win rate.
AI Has Partitioned the Market
The duopoly isn't a battle. It's a partition.
When queries include "enterprise," "compliance," or "customization," Salesforce wins decisively - up to 100% recommendation rate for financial services scenarios.
Everything else - ease of use, SMB, mid-market, fast setup - goes to HubSpot. It wins 92% of ease-of-use queries and holds the majority in every segment below enterprise.
AI routes buyers automatically based on company size. The segmentation is rigid. Competitors can't break through by competing across all sizes - AI won't let them.
Outside the Duopoly
The remaining 39% of mentions split across 46 solutions. Two challengers stand out:
Zoho CRM: The Hidden Challenger
Zoho appears first in just 4% of responses. Almost invisible. But in direct comparisons against Salesforce and HubSpot? Near parity - splitting decisions almost evenly with both.
Zoho's value positioning - praised for affordability more than any other attribute for any brand - proves highly effective when buyers explicitly compare options.
Its visibility is the problem. Its win rate is not.
Pipedrive: The Niche Specialist
Pipedrive has the highest positive sentiment of any CRM in our analysis at 95%. It wins by staying focused: visual pipeline, sales-first, no bloat.
When queries mention "sales pipeline" or "deal tracking," Pipedrive appears consistently. When they don't, it's invisible.
Low visibility. High win rate in its lane. The inverse of Salesforce.
What This Means
The CRM market shows what happens when AI learns your positioning: it routes buyers automatically, surfaces your weaknesses unprompted, and segments you whether you like it or not.
Three patterns worth noting:
Visibility ≠ winning. Salesforce proves that being mentioned first doesn't mean being recommended. If every mention comes with heavy caveats, you're training AI to recommend against you.
Specialists outperform their visibility. Pipedrive and Zoho both punch above their weight in head-to-heads. Focus and clear positioning beat broad visibility in direct comparisons.
AI is the new gatekeeper. Buyers who used to read 10 blog posts now ask one follow-up question. That question is increasingly "which is better for my situation" - and AI has already decided.
The Question for Your Brand
If someone asks AI to compare you against a competitor, what happens?
Do you win - or do you just show up?
Methodology
We analyzed responses from ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity across 90 buying scenarios. Our research emulates real user behavior - follow-up questions are generated based on AI responses, mirroring how buyers actually research purchases. Total responses analyzed: 360.