Your Brand has an AI reputation and it's shaping purchase decisions right now.
Swipe up to continue
6 AI models · 4 answers per model · ranked by score
ordered by brand score: 100 pts for rank 1 → 20 for rank 5 · no mention = 0
Each bar covers the middle half of one model’s answers (Q1–Q3); the line inside it is that model’s median rank for the times it recommended the brand. The badge under a brand says how far apart the models are on it, and “first choice” scores rank 1 far above the rest — a brand can place well overall and still rarely lead an answer.
Swipe left for the full report
Median rank each model gave each brand.
Scroll the table sideways to see every model →
| claude-opus-5 | deepseek-v4.1-flash | gemini-3.7-flash | gpt-6-astra | kimi-k3 | mistral-medium-3.5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starling Bank | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Revolut | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 1.0 |
| Tide | 1.0 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 1.5 | 3.0 |
| Monzo | 4.5 | 2.0 | 3.5 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Wise | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | — |
| Anna Money | — | 5.0 | — | — | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| Mercury | 4.0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Mettle | — | — | — | — | 5.0 | — |
A dash means that model never named the brand in any of its runs. Deeper blue is better: rank 1 is the brand a model would recommend first.
2 of 8 brands split the panel. Each mark is one model's score for the brand, on the same 0–100 scale as the ranking.
deepseek-v4.1-flash 45 → claude-opus-5 100
claude-opus-5 30 → gpt-6-astra 80
gpt-6-astra 50 → mistral-medium-3.5 100
claude-opus-5 75 → gpt-6-astra 100
mistral-medium-3.5 0 → kimi-k3 20 · 1 of 6 never named it
claude-opus-5 0 → mistral-medium-3.5 20 · 3 of 6 never named it
A hollow mark is a model that never named the brand in any of its runs, which scores 0. Agreement is not endorsement — a brand every model ignores equally agrees just as tightly as one they all rank first.
Across → how frequently the panel names the brand at all.
Up ↑ how often the answers that name it put it first.
The horizontal line sits at 20% — the rate a named brand would lead at if the models were picking one of its 5 slots at random. Above it they are choosing it first on purpose. Both figures average across models, so a thinly sampled model counts the same as a heavily sampled one.
Starling Bank leads with a score of 90 of 100, ranked by 6 of 6 models.
Starling Bank is the clearest point of consensus in this category, ranked by all six models and placed first by three of them. The split is narrow and structural: deepseek-v4.1-flash, gemini-3.7-flash and gpt-6-astra rank it first every time, while claude-opus-5, kimi-k3 and mistral-medium-3.5 hold it at rank 2 on the same reasoning — a full UK licence and FSCS protection, offset by weaker multi-currency and FX support. The disagreement is about ceiling, not floor.
per-model scores 75–100 of 100 · mean 90 across 6 models
Revolut and Tide are where the models diverge most sharply, and both divides turn on the same fault line: whether an internationally strong but non-fully-licensed provider belongs at the top. mistral-medium-3.5 ranks Revolut first in every run, while gpt-6-astra sits it lowest at a median rank of 3.5, docking it for plan fees on domestic use. Tide shows the widest spread of any brand (standard deviation 19.15), with claude-opus-5 placing it first and deepseek-v4.1-flash placing it fourth or lower — the same ClearBank e-money structure read as reassurance by one and as a gap by the other.
Tide · 55 points apart on a 0–100 scale
Monzo produces the most model-specific reversal. gpt-6-astra treats it as a close second (borda 80) suited to founder-led startups, while claude-opus-5 ranks it near-last (borda 30), treating its thinner multi-currency and integration set as disqualifying for scaling teams. No model ranked it first. This is the clearest case where two models applied the same facts to opposite conclusions about who Monzo is for.
Monzo ahead on 2 of 6 models
Where the panel converges is at the bottom. Wise draws unusual agreement (spread 0–20): five models rank it, none place it first, and all frame it as a treasury complement rather than a primary account, citing its lack of FSCS protection. Anna Money, Mercury and Mettle barely register, each pulled up only by isolated models — Mercury solely by claude-opus-5 on US-incorporation grounds, Mettle solely by kimi-k3.
The source patterns are broadly shared rather than distinguishing. Trustpilot×10 and brand-owned pages appear behind nearly every model's reasoning, which makes it hard to attribute the ranking splits to differing evidence. A plausible but unverified reading is that the licence-versus-features divide reflects how each model weighed FSCS status against international capability, not which sources it happened to recall — the recalled sources overlap too heavily to explain the gaps on their own.
43 sources across 313 references, grouped by site from 141 recalled names. The top 5 carry 43% of them.
trustpilot.com
Sources are what each model recalled as having shaped its view — not verified citations. A model without web access reconstructs a reference from memory, so a link may not lead where the model thought it did.
also named Starling
Starling Bank is one of the strongest performers in this category, scoring
Stat unavailableand ranked by all six models. The agreement is broad: per-model borda spans 75–100, and the split runs cleanly between two camps. Three models — deepseek-v4.1-flash, gemini-3.7-flash and gpt-6-astra — placed it first in every run, drawn to a consistent set of themes: a full UK banking licence with FSCS protection, a fee-free business account, accounting integrations (Xero, QuickBooks) and strong UK customer support. These points are anchored in recalled sources such as Trustpilot×10, Which?×6 and the Starling Bank business account page.
per-model scores 75–100 of 100 · mean 90 across 6 models
The remaining three — claude-opus-5, kimi-k3 and mistral-medium-3.5 — held it at rank 2, applying the same strengths but noting weaker multi-currency and international/FX support and less startup-specific tooling relative to rivals such as Tide, Revolut and Wise. That reservation, rather than any doubt about safety or day-to-day fitness, is what separates a first-place vote from a second.
“Starling is a fully licensed UK bank with FSCS protection, free everyday business banking, and consistently top-rated customer service in the CMA service quality surveys.”
“It ranks second rather than first because its multi-currency and international payment capabilities are weaker than Revolut's or Wise's.”
Highlights Starling as a fully licensed, FSCS-protected UK bank with a free business account, strong app, and accounting integrations (Xero, QuickBooks), while noting weaker international/FX support.
Repeatedly stresses full UK regulatory protection (FSCS up to £85,000), zero monthly fees, accounting software integrations, and award-winning UK customer support as making it the top choice for startups.
Frames Starling as the first choice for pound-focused UK startups given its no-fee business account, accounting integrations, and FSCS protection, while suggesting international-heavy businesses may need a specialist provider.
Emphasizes Starling's full UK banking licence with FSCS protection and free, top-rated business account, while consistently noting its weaker multi-currency support and less startup-specific/VC-oriented features versus rivals.
Points to Starling as a fully licensed UK bank with FSCS protection and a free, well-reviewed business account, but ranks it just behind rivals due to less startup-specific tooling and weaker international/multi-currency capabilities.
Consistently describes Starling as an FCA-regulated, fee-free business account with fast payments, strong API/integrations, and an emphasis on transparency and customer support for startups.
Each model’s own references for this brand, grouped by site. Tile area is that site’s share of the model’s references; tap one for the pages behind it.
starlingbank.com
Sources are what each model recalled as having shaped its view — not verified citations. A model without web access reconstructs a reference from memory, so a link may not lead where the model thought it did.
also named Revolut Business
Revolut scores a Borda average of
Stat unavailableand is ranked by all 6 of the 6 models, placing it firmly among the recommended options. The report labels the per-model spread of 50–100 "broad agreement," though the models do diverge on how high to place it: mistral-medium-3.5 ranked it first in all 4 of its runs (borda 100), while gpt-6-astra sat it lowest with a median rank of 3.5 (borda 50).
Revolut · 50 points apart on a 0–100 scale
The theme uniting the models is Revolut's strength for internationally oriented startups — multi-currency accounts, competitive FX, team cards and API-driven expense management recur across every reasoning. The reservations are equally consistent: several models flag the absence of full FSCS deposit protection, the still-maturing UK banking licence in its mobilisation phase, and recurring reports of account freezes and slow support. gpt-6-astra adds that plan fees and usage allowances make it less compelling for a mainly domestic startup. These themes lean on recalled sources including Trustpilot×10 for support and reliability signals, Siftedsifted.eu×7 and TechCrunch×3 for sector context, with Financial Times coverage and the FCA Register cited on the licence question.
“Revolut is the strongest option for startups with international operations, offering multi-currency accounts, near-interbank FX, bulk payments, expense management and a solid API.”
“For a mainly domestic startup, plan fees and usage allowances make it less compelling than the higher-ranked options; check the UK account's current legal provider and deposit-protection terms before holding substantial cash”
Revolut is presented as a top choice for UK startups, emphasizing multi-currency support, competitive FX, expense management, and accounting-tool integrations suited to scaling businesses.
Revolut excels for startups with international/cross-border operations via multi-currency accounts and competitive FX, but is held back by the lack of full UK FSCS deposit protection and support/account-freeze issues.
Revolut is positioned as the strongest option for internationally operating startups (multi-currency, interbank FX, strong API), with its UK banking licence in mobilisation improving credibility, but weighed down by expensive tiers, weak support, and account freezes.
Revolut is favored for multi-currency accounts and international payments, but repeatedly flagged for lacking FSCS protection (e-money status) and inconsistent customer support.
Revolut is the strongest choice for internationally ambitious startups (multi-currency, FX, team cards, API), but its recently granted, restricted UK banking licence in mobilisation plus account freezes and slow support add operational risk.
Revolut is attractive for startups paying overseas suppliers or managing multiple currencies, but less compelling for domestic-focused startups due to plan fees and allowances, with repeated advice to verify the legal entity and deposit protection.
Each model’s own references for this brand, grouped by site. Tile area is that site’s share of the model’s references; tap one for the pages behind it.
Sources are what each model recalled as having shaped its view — not verified citations. A model without web access reconstructs a reference from memory, so a link may not lead where the model thought it did.
Tide scores 65 of 100 on Borda and is ranked by all 6 of the 6 models, but the recommendation is far from unanimous. Per-model scores span 45 to 100 with a standard deviation of 19.15, which the report labels "models split." That gap traces a clean divide between claude-opus-5, which ranked Tide first in all four of its runs (borda 100), and the cluster of gpt-6-astra (50) and deepseek-v4.1-flash (45), which consistently placed it fourth or lower.
Tide · 55 points apart on a 0–100 scale
The theme uniting every model is that Tide is purpose-built for UK small businesses and startups — fast onboarding, invoicing, expense management, company formation and accounting integrations recur across all six. Where they diverge is on how much its e-money status weighs against it: claude-opus-5 and kimi-k3 treat the ClearBank partnership and FSCS protection as reassurance, while deepseek-v4.1-flash reads the same structure as a lack of protection and gpt-6-astra and gemini-3.7-flash dock it for transaction fees and paid extras as activity scales. Recalled sources concentrate on Trustpilotuk.trustpilot.com/review/tide.co×6 and Tide's own site, with comparison write-ups from Startups.co.uk×4 and MoneySavingExpert supporting the feature and pricing claims.
“Tide is purpose-built for UK small businesses and startups, with free company incorporation bundles, fast onboarding, invoicing, expense cards and accounting integrations.”
“It sits at rank four because per-transaction fees and a leaner feature set make it less attractive once a startup begins to scale.”
Tide is consistently described as purpose-built for UK small businesses and startups, with free company incorporation, fast onboarding, invoicing/expense tools, accounting integrations, and the largest UK SME challenger market share. The recurring caveat is that it is an e-money account rather than a full bank (FSCS protection via ClearBank).
Tide is repeatedly described as purpose-built for UK SMEs and startups with fast onboarding, invoicing, expense management and accounting integrations, noting funds held via ClearBank give FSCS protection, though it is an e-money platform and fees limit it as a startup scales.
Tide is consistently characterized as tailored for small businesses and startups with quick setup and invoicing tools, valued for simplicity and affordability but noted as lacking some advanced or scalable features of competitors.
Tide is consistently framed as tailored specifically for UK small businesses and sole traders with rapid onboarding and built-in bookkeeping/invoicing tools, but ranked lower due to transaction fees and its status as an e-money institution relying on partner banks.
Tide is consistently positioned as strong for business administration (invoicing, bookkeeping, company formation) but ranked below Starling and Monzo because of transaction charges and paid extras, with emphasis that it is a financial platform rather than a bank itself.
Tide is portrayed as a fast, low-cost account popular with small businesses offering invoicing and expense features, but repeatedly flagged as an e-money institution without FSCS protection, best suited to very early-stage needs rather than a scaling primary account.
Each model’s own references for this brand, grouped by site. Tile area is that site’s share of the model’s references; tap one for the pages behind it.
no URL recalled
Sources are what each model recalled as having shaped its view — not verified citations. A model without web access reconstructs a reference from memory, so a link may not lead where the model thought it did.
also named Monzo Business
Monzo lands mid-table with a Borda score of 51.67 of 100, ranked by all 6 of the 6 models but with notable disagreement on how highly to place it. The per-model span runs from 30 to 80 with a standard deviation of 18.41, which the report labels "models split."
per-model scores 30–80 of 100 · mean 52 across 6 models
The divide tracks a consistent theme: every model credits Monzo as a fully licensed, FSCS-protected UK bank with a polished app and useful touches like tax pots and invoicing, but they weigh its narrower business feature set differently. gpt-6-astra positions it as a close second to Starling and scored it 80, while claude-opus-5 sees the thinner multi-currency, FX and integration offering as disqualifying for scaling startups and scored it 30. Between them sit deepseek-v4.1-flash at 70 and the more skeptical kimi-k3 (35) and mistral-medium-3.5 (40), the latter pair emphasising that Monzo suits solo founders and micro-startups more than growing teams. No model ranked it first in any run. The recalled sources cluster around review aggregators and Monzo's own pages, with Trustpilotuk.trustpilot.com/review/monzo.com×5 and Which?www.which.co.uk×1 among those cited under these themes.
“Monzo is a close second for a small, founder-led startup because of its straightforward app, spending visibility and useful business administration features.”
“It's ranked last here because its feature set is thinner for scaling startups — weaker multi-currency/FX, fewer accounting and API integrations, and the Pro tier costs extra for capabilities rivals include free.”
Monzo is portrayed as a fully licensed, FSCS-protected bank with an intuitive app, tax pots and easy setup ideal for small founder-led teams, but with fewer features and integrations than Starling or Tide and paid tiers for fuller functionality.
Monzo is consistently positioned as a close second to Starling, praised for its intuitive app and spending visibility with FSCS protection, but with useful business features locked behind paid plans, prompting a cost comparison against Starling.
Monzo is framed as a fully licensed, FSCS-protected UK bank with a polished, award-winning app and features like tax pots and invoicing, but ranked behind Starling because multi-user access and advanced tools sit behind paid subscription tiers.
Monzo is described as a licensed UK bank with excellent UX and features like tax pots that suit solo founders and early-stage teams, but with a thinner, less mature business feature set than Tide or Starling that limits its fit for scaling or international startups.
Monzo is characterized as user-friendly and well-integrated, ideal for sole traders and micro-startups with basic needs, but lacking advanced business features like multi-currency support compared to Revolut or Starling.
Monzo is consistently described as a fully licensed, FSCS-protected UK bank with an excellent app and features like tax pots and invoicing, but with a narrower business feature set (limited multi-currency/FX, fewer integrations) that suits UK-only solo founders and small teams over scaling startups.
Each model’s own references for this brand, grouped by site. Tile area is that site’s share of the model’s references; tap one for the pages behind it.
Sources are what each model recalled as having shaped its view — not verified citations. A model without web access reconstructs a reference from memory, so a link may not lead where the model thought it did.
also named Wise Business
Wise scores 16.67 of 100 on Borda, ranked by 5 of the 6 models but never placed first by any of them. The agreement here is unusually tight: per-model Borda spans 0–20 with a standard deviation of 7.45, which the report labels "models agree." Every model that ranked it landed on the same conclusion, differing only in how far down the list they placed it — kimi-k3 gave it a median rank of 4, while claude-opus-5, deepseek-v4.1-flash, gemini-3.7-flash and gpt-6-astra all settled on a median rank of 5.
per-model scores 0–20 of 100 · mean 17 across 6 models
The theme behind that consensus is consistent across all five: Wise is valued for low-cost international payments, mid-market FX rates and multi-currency holding, but is treated as a complement rather than a primary account because it is an e-money or payments institution lacking FSCS protection, credit and overdrafts. Recalled sources cluster around user-review and comparison material, with Trustpilot×10 appearing most often across models, alongside the Wise Businesswise.com/gb/business×5 official site. The distinction models draw is not about quality but role — a specialist treasury tool paired with a UK business bank rather than the bank itself.
“Best used as a complement rather than the primary account.”
“For most UK startups, it serves best as a secondary treasury tool alongside a primary UK clearing bank.”
Wise is described as outstanding for low-cost international payments and multi-currency accounts, but ranked last as a primary bank because it is an e-money institution without FSCS protection or credit products, best used as a complement.
Wise is positioned as an excellent supplementary account for cross-border payments and multi-currency holding, but ranked lowest as a primary option because it is not a bank—lacking FSCS protection, credit, and overdrafts.
Wise is presented as a strong companion account for international transfers and multi-currency holding, but not a full UK bank—no FSCS protection or lending—so it is best used as a secondary tool rather than a primary account.
Wise is highlighted for mid-market FX rates and multi-currency international payments, but as an electronic money/payment institution rather than a full bank it lacks credit facilities and FSCS coverage, making it a complement to a primary domestic bank.
Wise is valued for international revenue collection and overseas payments with transparent pricing, but ranked fifth as a primary account because it is a payments provider with safeguarded rather than FSCS-protected balances, best paired with a UK business bank.
Each model’s own references for this brand, grouped by site. Tile area is that site’s share of the model’s references; tap one for the pages behind it.
wise.com
Sources are what each model recalled as having shaped its view — not verified citations. A model without web access reconstructs a reference from memory, so a link may not lead where the model thought it did.
where
where
Each one is a single question put to every active AI model, many times over.
See every category with its question and leaders.
Tell us what to ask and how wide to sample it — we run it and send back the report.