Gimbal

Name: Gimbal
Brand: Gimbal

Gimbal translates location data into intent, conversion and insights for marketers.

Est 2011|Valuation $83.7M|Raised $25.1M

LinkedIn 3K|Web traffic 2K|FTEs 95|HQ Los Angeles, California, US

MarketsMobile App Engagement Location Intelligence

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

- Gimbal vs Radar (location infrastructure): Radar positions itself as a developer-focused geofencing platform with claims about accuracy and uptime and reports SOC 2 compliance. Infillion markets Gimbal for enterprise use and privacy-focused location services, but equivalent published audit/certification details were not located in the sources captured for this review. - Gimbal vs GroundTruth (geofencing advertising): GroundTruth emphasizes buying geofencing campaigns via CPM/CPV models and publishes budgeting guidance. Gimbal’s publicly listed Pro package appears to be a platform subscription for integrating location capabilities into an app and analytics workflows.

Adoption trends / market signals

Infillion press materials report relationships with a large number of brands, but these figures are vendor-published and were not independently validated in the sources reviewed.

	Gimbal (Infillion)	Radar	GroundTruth
Starting Price	Publicly listed Pro geofencing package at a low-hundreds-per-month price point	Not publicly listed in the sources reviewed	Media pricing framed as CPM/CPV; public guidance shows ranges in vendor FAQ
Primary Use Case	Platform for integrating location capabilities into mobile apps (geofences/POIs + push triggers + visitation analytics; optional beacons)	Developer-focused geofencing infrastructure and SDKs	Location-driven media buying and geofencing ad campaigns (CPM/CPV purchase model)
Key Observed Strength	Combines place management, geofencing, optional beacons, and marketing workflows; public self-serve package exists	Developer-focused tooling and publicly stated security compliance claims	Public ad-buying model guidance and budgeting documentation for marketers
Key Observed Weakness	Limited publicly documented security/compliance evidence in sources reviewed; limited third-party review volume; some reports of UI and battery concerns	Public pricing information not as transparent in sources reviewed; may be more engineering-centric than marketing teams need	Primarily a media platform rather than an in-app SDK solution; may not serve app-embedded SDK use cases

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Gimbal vs Radar (location infrastructure): Radar positions itself as a developer-focused geofencing platform with claims about accuracy and uptime and reports SOC 2 compliance. Infillion markets Gimbal for enterprise use and privacy-focused location services, but equivalent published audit/certification details were not located in the sources captured for this review.
Gimbal vs GroundTruth (geofencing advertising): GroundTruth emphasizes buying geofencing campaigns via CPM/CPV models and publishes budgeting guidance. Gimbal’s publicly listed Pro package appears to be a platform subscription for integrating location capabilities into an app and analytics workflows.

Adoption trends / market signals

Infillion press materials report relationships with a large number of brands, but these figures are vendor-published and were not independently validated in the sources reviewed.

	Gimbal (Infillion)	Radar	GroundTruth
Starting Price	Publicly listed Pro geofencing package at a low-hundreds-per-month price point	Not publicly listed in the sources reviewed	Media pricing framed as CPM/CPV; public guidance shows ranges in vendor FAQ
Primary Use Case	Platform for integrating location capabilities into mobile apps (geofences/POIs + push triggers + visitation analytics; optional beacons)	Developer-focused geofencing infrastructure and SDKs	Location-driven media buying and geofencing ad campaigns (CPM/CPV purchase model)
Key Observed Strength	Combines place management, geofencing, optional beacons, and marketing workflows; public self-serve package exists	Developer-focused tooling and publicly stated security compliance claims	Public ad-buying model guidance and budgeting documentation for marketers
Key Observed Weakness	Limited publicly documented security/compliance evidence in sources reviewed; limited third-party review volume; some reports of UI and battery concerns	Public pricing information not as transparent in sources reviewed; may be more engineering-centric than marketing teams need	Primarily a media platform rather than an in-app SDK solution; may not serve app-embedded SDK use cases