G2’s marketing automation category lists more than 700 platforms (as at October 2026), and the top 15 by G2 score include HubSpot, ActiveCampaign, Mailchimp, Klaviyo and Salesforce. G2 shows what customers think of these products after they buy. A vendor’s homepage is what a buyer reads while still deciding, so we ran all 15 through Liffey’s positioning check to see how much of what each one claims a buyer could verify.
Buyers Trust What Customers Say, and Check What Vendors Say
TrustRadius surveyed 1,862 technology buyers for its 2026 B2B Buying Disconnect Report. 63% had used AI during a purchase, and 94% of those fact-checked what the AI told them at least some of the time. Buyers ranked vendor marketing collateral last among the sources they consult, and for the final decision they trusted product demos, free trials, their own experience and user reviews.
It should surprise nobody that buyers discount website claims they have no way to check, and it matters most for the vendors in this benchmark. Their customers have done the hard work on G2, in reviews and ratings a buyer can read and weigh. When that buyer clicks through to the vendor’s homepage and meets a figure with no source, the homepage undermines the trust those customers built. A claim with its evidence beside it lets the buyer judge it for themselves, and keeps that trust.
The Questions a Careful Buyer Asks of Every Homepage Claim
The check reads a page the way a careful buyer would and puts 5 questions to every claim:
- How do you know? Is there any evidence behind the claim: a study, a sample, a source a buyer can follow?
- Could this be any business? Put a competitor’s name in place of the vendor’s. If the claim still reads true, it says nothing about this vendor.
- Who says so? Is the claim attributed to someone a reader can identify, such as a named customer or analyst?
- Could I check it? Is the report, award or ranking named precisely enough to look up?
- As at when? Is the claim tied to a date or a period, so a reader can tell whether it is still true?
Behind those 5 questions are 32 more checks, 37 in all, which we use internally to look for the tells of machine-written copy and for positioning that would fit any competitor.
We’ve created our own scoring rubric, and we call it confident garbage. Each artefact gets a confident garbage score out of 100. The closer to 100, the more the writing shows the tells of AI and the less evidence it gives for its claims.
- Grounded Judgement10 or under
- Mostly Grounded11 to 25
- Partly Grounded26 to 50
- Thinly Grounded51 to 75
- Confident Garbage76 and above
A lower score means more of a page’s claims come with evidence a buyer can verify. A score above 25 usually means the claims have drifted from the evidence the business already has.
How G2’s Top 15 Marketing Automation Vendors Scored
We scored each homepage in late September and early October 2026. A lower score means a buyer can check more of the page’s claims, and each platform’s full report shows how its score was reached.
Each score splits into its components: claims with nothing behind them, writing with the tells of machine generation, and positioning that would fit any competitor.
| Platform | Score | Breakdown | Full report |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brevo | Confident Garbage | ||
| Mailchimp | Confident Garbage | ||
| ActiveCampaign | Confident Garbage | ||
| EngageBay | Confident Garbage | ||
| Attentive | Thinly Grounded | ||
| HubSpot | Thinly Grounded | ||
| Omnisend | Thinly Grounded | ||
| Salesforce | Thinly Grounded | ||
| Insider One | Thinly Grounded | ||
| Customer.io | Thinly Grounded | ||
| Bloomreach | Partly Grounded | ||
| Braze | Partly Grounded | ||
| Dotdigital | Partly Grounded | ||
| GetResponse | Partly Grounded | ||
| Klaviyo | Partly Grounded |
The average score was 57, and all 15 scored above 25. For comparison, the homepage of The Irish Times scored 4, in the Grounded Judgement band: a front page where every story is dated, bylined and specific. Closer to these vendors’ world, Stripe scored 20 and PayPal scored 19, both Mostly Grounded.
The Homepage Claims a Buyer Could Not Check
On each of the 15 homepages, we picked out the claims written as fact: the numbers, rankings and comparisons a buyer might repeat to their boss. For each of those claims, we looked for support on the same homepage, such as a source, a date, a named customer or a report. The 7 claims that stood out are the ones where the homepage gave a buyer nothing to check them against, or evidence that says less than the claim.
“The only vendor ranked #1 in every area marketing teams care about.”
Leaves unansweredHow do you know?Could I check it?
Insider One’s homepage calls it “the only vendor ranked #1 in every area marketing teams care about”. That line opens the section listing its analyst recognitions, under the heading “Loved by brands, recognized by analysts”. The recognitions are impressive. IDC names Insider One a Leader in agentic marketing, and Gartner names it a Leader in its Magic Quadrant for personalization engines.
Being named a Leader puts a vendor in the top group of a report, and that group has several members. The Gartner chart on Insider One’s own homepage shows it in the Leaders square with SAP, Salesforce and others, and the IDC chart beside it shows the same. The Gartner card also shows Insider One’s ratings in 3 areas, including 3.7 out of 5 for services and support.
So Insider One’s own homepage shows a well-regarded vendor, one of several leaders in its category, while its claim is first place in every area. A buyer who looks at the charts sees the gap, and starts to wonder what else on Insider One’s homepage is overstated.
“Find out why customers see up to 27x ROI.”
Leaves unansweredHow do you know?As at when?
Mailchimp’s homepage invites buyers to “find out why customers see up to 27x ROI”, in the section promoting its Standard plan and free 14-day trial. The 27x has an asterisk, which promises a buyer a source.
The footnotes at the bottom of the homepage cover feature availability, AI and SMS, and none of them explains the ROI figure. Further down, the same homepage says e-commerce customers “saw up to 30x ROI when they connected their stores to Mailchimp”, with another asterisk and no explanation either.
So a buyer reads 2 different ROI figures on Mailchimp’s homepage, with no study, sample or period behind either. Neither can go into the business case the buyer has to write to get the purchase approved.
“Cut 13 hours of marketing busywork each week.”
Leaves unansweredHow do you know?Could I check it?
ActiveCampaign’s homepage gives search engines and screen readers the headline “Cut 13 hours of marketing busywork each week”, with a footnote marker after “week”. Visitors see a rotating banner in its place, and the page never gives the footnote.
Further down, a stat block says “10 hours saved each week”, beside “8x faster to launch your first campaign”, “17% higher click-through rates” and “3x more clicks than a leading competitor”. None of these has a source, a period or a sample, and the competitor is never named.
So ActiveCampaign’s homepage gives a buyer 2 different time savings, 13 hours and 10, and a comparison with a competitor nobody can identify. A buyer has no way to tell which number to believe, or to check the comparison.
“Resolves 65% of questions autonomously.”
Leaves unansweredCould this be any business?How do you know?
Klaviyo’s homepage says its customer service agent “resolves 65% of questions autonomously”. HubSpot’s homepage says its AI agents “can resolve over 65% of customer inquiries”.
Neither Klaviyo nor HubSpot says whose inquiries were counted, over what period, or what counted as resolved. The 65% may well be true for both.
When the same 65% appears on rival homepages with no measurement behind it, a buyer comparing Klaviyo and HubSpot has no way to tell the products apart, and the figure reads like an industry talking point.
“HubSpot’s paid plans start at $800/month for marketing features.”
Leaves unansweredHow do you know?
EngageBay’s homepage has an FAQ that compares it with HubSpot. It says “HubSpot’s paid plans start at $800/month for marketing features”, while EngageBay’s equivalent starts at $12.74 per user per month.
We checked that price against HubSpot’s own pricing page. It lists Marketing Hub Starter at $20 per seat per month; $800 is where the Professional plan starts.
So EngageBay quotes the wrong entry price for HubSpot. A buyer who trusts the FAQ goes into a pricing conversation with the wrong number, and the first person to correct them will be HubSpot’s salesperson.
“117% more purchases.”
Leaves unansweredHow do you know?Who says so?As at when?
Attentive’s homepage puts the figure “117% more purchases” under its section headed “Achieve true personalization”.
The 117% is 1 of a set of performance figures on Attentive’s homepage, with “2x higher list growth”, “2x higher ROI”, “20% higher CVR” and “50% revenue increased”. None of them names a customer, a time period or how it was measured.
So a buyer reading Attentive’s homepage has no way to tell whether 117% was 1 brand’s best month or what a typical customer can expect, and that is the question the figure needs to answer before it goes into a business case.
“Live in 30–45 days, no SI required.”
Leaves unansweredHow do you know?Who says so?
Salesforce’s B2B marketing automation page says Piper, its AI sales agent, is “live in 30–45 days, no SI required”. The same page promises that marketers can go “from idea to in-market in hours, not weeks”.
Both promises may be true for some Salesforce customers. Neither says which customers, or how often.
A buyer planning a rollout will hold Salesforce to the 30 to 45 days, whether or not their business looks like the customers behind that number.
How the Best-Evidenced Homepages Keep Their Customers’ Trust
Grounded judgement starts with 1 habit: the evidence appears where the buyer reads the claim, as a named customer, a dated report, or a figure with its case study 1 click away. A homepage that does this for every claim, in words only that company could use, moves toward Grounded Judgement, a score of 10 or under. Klaviyo, Dotdigital, GetResponse, Braze and Customer.io each do it across part of their homepage, and each shows a habit any marketing team can copy.
What it does wellProduct claims only Klaviyo could make
Klaviyo’s homepage describes its products in words only Klaviyo could use: “With one prompt, Composer audits your flows, segments and forms, and creates an entire on-brand campaign to maximise your revenue”, with a link to explore Composer.
Klaviyo’s customer results are just as specific. Each figure, such as “21% YoY growth in revenue from CRM in last 12 months”, appears beside a link to the named brand’s case study.
Specific product copy and linked results are how Klaviyo earned the best score of the 15, at 34. Only 9 of those points came from claims with nothing behind them, against 55 for Brevo and Mailchimp; the rest came from generic positioning and machine tells.
What it does wellEvery statistic dated and sourced
Dotdigital’s homepage gives each of its statistics the year and the name of the report it came from: “53% of consumers say loyalty programs improve their relationship with a brand (Customer trend index 2026)”.
Dotdigital’s case-study figures follow the same habit, each one beside the case study it came from, and its testimonials name the person and their role.
A buyer can check every statistic against its source and date, which is why only 14 of Dotdigital’s 37 points came from claims with nothing behind them.
What it does wellA name, role and company on every customer claim
GetResponse’s homepage puts a named customer behind each result: “We generated $43,000 in sales with just 10 emails using GetResponse”, from Szymon Grocholewski, CEO at Med&Beauty.
Each GetResponse result links to the full case study, so a buyer can read how the number was reached.
A name, a role and a company turn a marketing claim into a reference a buyer can follow up. GetResponse scored 37, and most of its remaining points come from the generic lines around that proof.
What it does wellEvery recognition dated and linked
Braze’s homepage dates and links every recognition it claims. It says Braze is “a Leader in the 2026 Gartner Magic Quadrant for Multichannel Marketing Hubs”, with the report to download, and links its Forrester Total Economic Impact study and its G2 ranking to the Fall 2026 grid report.
Braze’s testimonials follow the same habit, with a name and a role beneath every quote, such as Victoria Mitchell, Manager of CRM Channel Strategy at Pizza Hut.
A buyer can check every recognition at its source. Braze’s score of 43 comes from its broad headlines, which would read the same under a competitor’s name.
What it does wellEvery result linked to its case study
Customer.io’s homepage puts each customer result beside the customer who achieved it. Buffer’s case study shows a “28% increase in click-through rates” and a “22% increase in email conversion rates”, with a quote from Simon Heaton, Director of Growth Marketing, and a link to the full case study.
Customer.io’s security claims are named as well: ISO 27001, SOC, GDPR, CCPA and HIPAA, beside a link to its security page.
Every Customer.io result links to the case study behind it. Customer.io scored 51 because its headline copy would read true under a competitor’s name; its proof is ready to support stronger headlines.
Klaviyo, Dotdigital, GetResponse, Braze and Customer.io put the evidence beside the claim, where a buyer can check it on the spot, and that protects the trust their customers built on G2.
Where Homepage Claims Drift From the Evidence
Between them, these 15 companies publish the evidence: G2 reviews, analyst placements, case studies and dated reports. Claims drift from that evidence when the teams who hold the proof and the people writing the homepage work from different pictures of the business. The gaps in this benchmark look like that drift: Mailchimp’s homepage gives 2 different ROI figures, ActiveCampaign’s gives 2 different weekly time savings, and Insider One’s turns Leader placements from Gartner and IDC into a claim of first place in every area.
Here at Liffey, we enable businesses to lock in a confirmed source of truth for how they win and grow customers, with the evidence attached, so every team works from the same picture, including the people writing the website.
For anyone buying a marketing automation platform, G2 is a good place to build a shortlist. On the first call with each vendor, ask for the source behind 1 number on their homepage; a vendor whose sales team and website work from the same evidence can answer on the spot.
Sources
- G2: Marketing Automation category
- Vendor homepages: Brevo, Mailchimp, ActiveCampaign, EngageBay, Attentive, HubSpot, Omnisend, Salesforce, Insider One, Customer.io, Bloomreach, Braze, Dotdigital, GetResponse and Klaviyo, plus HubSpot’s Marketing Hub pricing
- TrustRadius, 2026 B2B Buying Disconnect Report: full report, press release (PR Newswire) and HG Insights’ summary