Sales Tech Index
How we produce the index
Every position in this index comes from published, dated evidence run through a versioned set of weightings. This page is the whole method, including the parts that make it an editorial judgement rather than a measurement.
Evidence
What counts as evidence
A figure is only usable if it names its publisher, links to the page the figure actually appears on, and carries both the date it was published and the date we read it. We record whether a figure is independently verified, independently reported, the vendor’s own claim or our estimate — and an estimate never carries a position on its own.
Where a signal has no source we can stand behind, it is dropped rather than scored as zero. Each ranking publishes the share of weighted signals it managed to evidence, so a thin ranking reads like a thin ranking.
Weightings
Versioned scoring
Weightings are versioned so they can change without rewriting the pages that used the old ones.
Most widely adopted — version adoption-1.0
In effect from 2026-09-01. Refreshed at least every 120 days.
Adoption is weighted towards evidence of how many organisations and people genuinely use a tool, with review volume, integration ecosystem and search demand as corroborating signals.
| Signal | Weight |
|---|---|
| Customer organisations | 3 |
| Active users | 3 |
| Revenue or ARR | 2 |
| Published reviews | 2 |
| Named enterprise customers | 1 |
| Documented integrations | 1 |
| Website traffic | 1 |
| Search demand | 1 |
| Community or follower audience | 1 |
A ranking publishes only with at least 5 assessed vendors and 50% of the weighted signals evidenced for each of them.
What this version cannot tell you
- This is an editorial index built from published sources, not audited market share.
- Vendors publish different figures on different dates, so signals are never perfectly comparable.
- A tool absent from a ranking may simply have published nothing we could source.
- Adoption evidence favours vendors that publish customer counts, which larger vendors do more often.
Growth and momentum — version momentum-1.0
In effect from 2026-09-01. Refreshed at least every 90 days.
Momentum is weighted towards rate of change rather than size: revenue and customer growth first, then traffic, search, review and hiring growth, with funding and release cadence as corroboration.
| Signal | Weight |
|---|---|
| Revenue or ARR growth | 3 |
| Customer growth | 3 |
| Traffic growth | 2 |
| Search demand growth | 2 |
| Review growth | 1 |
| Headcount growth | 1 |
| Community growth | 1 |
| Disclosed funding | 1 |
| Product release cadence | 1 |
A ranking publishes only with at least 5 assessed vendors and 50% of the weighted signals evidenced for each of them.
What this version cannot tell you
- This is an editorial index built from published sources, not audited market share.
- Vendors publish different figures on different dates, so signals are never perfectly comparable.
- A tool absent from a ranking may simply have published nothing we could source.
- Growth rates flatter small vendors: a move from 20 to 40 customers outranks 2,000 to 2,600 on percentage alone, which is why rationale is published next to every position.
- Funding and valuation are signals of investor conviction, not of customer adoption.
Independence
Commercial relationships
No vendor pays to appear in this index, and there is no affiliate arrangement behind any link on it. If that ever changes, the arrangement will be labelled on the page it applies to.
Scoring and ordering are produced from editorial evidence only — the code that decides a position cannot read a commercial field at all, so a future arrangement could not quietly move anybody up the list.
No ranking is published yet: the categories and the method are built, the sourced evidence is still being gathered.
Hiring people to run your sales stack?
We assess salespeople on how they sell, not on which tools they have logged into.