Every category where a model named Citibank 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
Business banking	Treasury and cash	0%	77 of 78	55%	11	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Citibank 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 Citibank across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	1	3
Kimi K2	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	0	2
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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative11 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative12 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative33 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 2 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“Citibank has struggled with a tarnished reputation... customer complaints frequently focusing on the bank's outdated technology and confusing online banking system” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Business banking · negative prompt · hard negative

“Why avoid: Heavy criticism for poor service and history of regulatory violations” Kimi K2 · Business banking · negative prompt · hard negative

“it is often safer to avoid the two largest players (Wells Fargo and Citi)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Business banking · negative prompt · hard negative

“85k+ complaints, F BBB, regulatory violations, poor customer service.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Business banking · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Citibank, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Citibank was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Bank of America27 of 322Not in the top three

Chase Business Banking24 of 3210Not in the top three

Wells Fargo21 of 320Not in the top three

Mercury14 of 321Not in the top three

HSBC10 of 321Not in the top three

Brex9 of 322Not in the top three

PNC Bank9 of 320Not in the top three

Ramp8 of 321Not in the top three

Rho6 of 321Not in the top three

BNP Paribas6 of 320Not 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 Citibank. 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 26 of the 32 answers that named Citibank and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

forbes.com14

nerdwallet.com12

rho.co10

rfp.wiki9

backbase.com8

ethicalconsumer.org8

found.com8

thepennyhoarder.com8

finder.com7

handelsblatt.com7

Ninety-one of the ninety-one domain citations in answers naming Citibank came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

forbes.com/financial-services/best-business-checking-accounts9

backbase.com/blog/top-business-banking-platform-providers8

ethicalconsumer.org/money-finance/shopping-guide/ethical-business-banking8

thepennyhoarder.com/bank-accounts/worst-banks8

found.com/resources/business-banking/best-business-bank-accounts-growing-businesses-employ7

handelsblatt.com/geschaeftskonto/vergleich7

rho.co/blog/best-online-business-bank-accounts7

amnistreasury.com/blog/business-account-comparison4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Citibank

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Citibank; a claim can dispute any of them.

Citi 3Citi Business 1Citibank (Citi) 1

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 Citibank'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 Citibank, 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 citibank.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.