B2B brands across the Asia-Pacific region are demonstrating strong credibility but struggling to differentiate themselves from competitors, according to a new research report from Thinksmart Marketing.
The inaugural 2026 APAC B2B Brand Relevance Index analyzed 100 publicly observable B2B brands with an APAC market presence across cybersecurity, financial services and fintech, professional services, and B2B SaaS and enterprise software. It found Competitive Differentiation was the lowest or equal-lowest scoring dimension for 92% of brands assessed, and the outright lowest for 68%.
Competitive Differentiation averaged 70 out of 100, while Proof & Trust scored 85, which the company says highlights a gap between brands’ competence in demonstrating credibility and their ability to create preference by connecting with the needs of buyers in the moment they are in.
“Buyers can see you, recognise that you are credible and still struggle to explain why you are the better choice for their situation,” said Janine Pares, CEO and Founder, Thinksmart Marketing.
“The opportunity now is to make it much clearer why you matter, how you’re different and why a buyer should choose you over another credible alternative. That doesn’t just mean giving buyers more rational proof points, but actually finding ways to reach the human behind the decision and connect with their urgent needs now – make them feel a connection to your brand backed up by the proof-points. That becomes even more important as AI makes it easier for every organisation to produce polished content at scale. More content won’t solve the relevance problem if it is clinical and running towards the average of what everyone is saying in your category.”
Brand Relevance Gap
The company has coined this the ‘Brand Relevance Gap’: the disconnect between what a brand communicates publicly and the information buyers need to assess its relevance, differentiation and credibility during early evaluation.
According to the findings, the commercial implications are becoming more significant as buyers form preferences earlier in the purchasing journey. The report cites Forrester research showing 68% of B2B buyers begin the purchasing process with a preferred vendor already in mind, and that preferred vendor goes on to win the business 80% of the time.
“B2B marketing has never been more competent with most brands visible, with strong content and the ability to demonstrate credible effectiveness proof for their services,” said Pares.
“Unfortunately competence has become the price of entry, and the cost is the ability to stand out from competitors. It means when buyers are choosing their shortlists they are picking between a number of credible organisations that look remarkably similar. If a buyer can’t quickly pick you apart from your competition and quickly understand why you’re different and why you matter, there’s a very real risk you won’t make their day-one shortlist and miss that sale.”
When buyers are choosing their shortlists they are picking between a number of credible organisations that look remarkably similar.
The company conducted the analysis using the OutGrow Intelligence System, its AI-powered platform which analyzes the relevance of a brand’s market positioning to its buyers.
The index also found 76 of the 100 brands sit within the ‘Sameness Zone’, a cluster of brands that demonstrate credible, familiar category signals but communicate relatively limited visible distinction from comparable alternatives. In complex or high-risk categories, familiar signals can help buyers assess credibility and reduce risk. According to the report, the opportunity is not to abandon those signals, but to complement them with a clearer, more buyer-relevant reason to choose.
More than half (58) of brands analyzed were clustered within a narrow 10-point band between 75 and 84.
Just 12 brands scored above 85 to reach the ‘Breakaway Zone’, characterized by clearer relevance and distinction, suggesting that while most organizations have established the credibility required to compete, far fewer are visibly making it easy for a prospective buyer to understand why they may be the more relevant choice.
The challenge was particularly pronounced in Professional Services, which recorded the lowest average weighted index of the four sectors analyzed, at 74. Every Professional Services brand assessed had Competitive Differentiation as its lowest or equal-lowest dimension, with the sector averaging 64.
The research also found visibility can mask underlying relevance weaknesses. Discovery Readiness averaged 82, making it the second strongest dimension, yet 80 of the 100 brands showed possible or strong marketing maturity bias, where scale, brand recognition, content volume or digital presence may make a brand appear more relevant than its underlying buyer-facing differentiation suggests.
Methodology: The report is based on a directional analysis of 100 publicly observable B2B brands with an APAC market presence across four sectors: Cybersecurity, Financial Services / Fintech, Professional Services, and B2B SaaS / Enterprise Software.
