SuiteCRM is named in 81 of 88 answers when the buyer says "open source", and 0 of 132 when they do not

I posted here last week that SuiteCRM did not appear once on a small-business CRM board I publish. This is the other half of that measurement, which I did not have at the time, and it is a different question so it is a new topic rather than another reply on the old one.

What I measure. I ask AI answer engines 44 different phrasings of one buying question, count every product named across every answer, and publish the raw answers. No vendor pays. There is no candidate list written in advance — the board is simply everyone the engines named.

Board one — “which small business CRM should we buy?” 44 phrasings, ChatGPT + Gemini + Perplexity, 132 answers, 63 distinct products named. SuiteCRM: not once. HubSpot 92.4%, Pipedrive 87.9%, Zoho 61.4%. The only open-source names anywhere on it are Odoo at 2 mentions (rank 35) and Vtiger at 1 (rank 62). That board has been re-run with a third engine since I first posted about it and now stands at 132 answers; SuiteCRM is still not on it.

Board two — “which open source self-hosted CRM should we deploy?” 44 phrasings, Gemini + Perplexity, 88 answers, 29 distinct products named.

rank product mentions of 88 named in
1 EspoCRM 82 93.2% 43 of 44 phrasings
2 SuiteCRM 81 92.0% 44 of 44 phrasings
3 Odoo Community 43 48.9% 31 of 44 phrasings
6 Vtiger 16 18.2% 11 of 44 phrasings

SuiteCRM’s 81 by engine: Gemini 41, Perplexity 40.

So SuiteCRM is not unknown to the engines. It is the most consistently named product on the open-source board — the only one of the 29 that came back in all 44 phrasings — and it is invisible the moment the buyer has not already said “open source” first.

Four things wrong with this, before anyone quotes it at me.

  1. The two boards do not use the same engines. The open-source one is Gemini and Perplexity only; ChatGPT is not in it. That alone means 0-of-132 and 81-of-88 are not a clean before-and-after, and it is the biggest hole in this post.
  2. They are also not the same 44 questions with a clause added. They are two separately written question families.
  3. Rank 1 against rank 2 is one mention out of 88. That is inside run-to-run noise and I would not defend “second” as a fact. What the data supports is “EspoCRM and SuiteCRM are the two the engines name, at roughly the same rate”.
  4. Different dates — 3–6 August and 6 August.

Both boards are published with every question and every verbatim answer behind them, so any line above is checkable rather than something you have to take from me:

There is nothing to buy in this post and no link to anything I sell. What I would like from this forum is the part I cannot measure: does it match what you see? When a new SuiteCRM deployment turns up, had the person already decided they wanted open source before they asked anyone anything — or does anybody ever arrive because an assistant suggested it cold?

1 Like

Hello,

The board is re-measured every month. For $9.99 a month …

so overall, probably quite an interesting self promotion / link building - which might add some interesting insights and value around the promotion (so not outright spam).
Looking at the main domain, it appears to be programmatic SEO.
If you do engage with all communities of all tools, at least you’ve got some traffic for starters and won’t be removed from the communities, since you’re contributing something.

Overall, the AI generated content seems to be quite shallow.
CRM projects don’t fail or succeed because of open source or specific search strings in Google or AI. For smaller companies, maybe some with some tech knowledge and 0 budget, open source might be interesting due to the cost and simple way to install a CRM.
Installing a CRM isn’t valuable to a company at all.
It’s the processes, the digital transformation and the integration.
So again .. the approach is just wrong. That is a popular method of phrasing things on Reddit, but overall, the more successful project implementations / established companies / teams ask different questions and ideally do a thorough evaluation.