Mentoring software · October 2026 Edition
Together vs MentorcliQ
Six of fourteen models named Together first on the direct prompt; four named MentorcliQ. Both were named by all fourteen models and Together carries 46 labels and MentorcliQ 43, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in three categories this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share28%9%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate4%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#3A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels4643A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Together reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Qooper was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Together vs Mentorloop · Together vs PushFar · Together vs Chronus
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the mentoring software page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
TogetherFirst choices, of fourteen modelsMentorcliQ
Direct64
Paraphrase812 against MentorcliQ
Comparative15
Budget-constrained002 against Together · 2 against MentorcliQ
Scale-constrained101 against MentorcliQ
Negative00
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Together and MentorcliQ were named in the same answer 126 times, of the 168 answers naming Together and the 152 naming MentorcliQ. In those answers MentorcliQ took the first choice twenty-six times and Together twenty-three.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Together and MentorcliQ stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | ||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | |||
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | |||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | ||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | |
Together MentorcliQ first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Together on the left and MentorcliQ on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Together and MentorcliQ stood in it.
Together first, MentorcliQ an alternative
6 of 14 modelsMentorcliQ was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Mentorloop, Together alternatives: Guider, Qooper
Gemini 3.5 FlashTogether alternatives: Guider, Mentorloop, Qooper
Mistral SmallTogether alternatives: Mentorgain, Qooper
Kimi K2Together alternatives: MentorcliQ, Qooper
MiniMax M2.5Mentorloop, Together alternatives: Chronus, MentorcliQ, Mentorgain, PushFar
GPT-6 LunaTogether alternatives: Chronus, MentorcliQ, Qooper
MentorcliQ first, Together an alternative
4 of 14 modelsTogether was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Perplexity SonarMentorcliQ alternatives: Chronus, Together
Grok 4.1 FastMentorcliQ alternatives: Chronus, Qooper, Together
DeepSeek V4 FlashMentorcliQ alternatives: Chronus, Qooper, Together
GLM 4.7 FlashXMentorcliQ, Mentorloop alternatives: Chronus, Qooper
Neither was the first choice, one was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniChronus alternatives: MentorcliQ, Together
Neither was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Llama 4 MaverickGuider, MentorCity, Qooper, Together Corporate Mentorship
Qwen 3.7 FlashChronus, MentorFlow alternatives: CoachHub, Lighthouse, Talmundo
Muse Glimmer 30BMentorloop alternatives: Guider, MentorCity
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Together leads by two points.
Together6%#5 of 12MentorcliQ4%#6 of 12Mid-marketThe figures above
Together leads by nineteen points.
Together28%#1 of 12MentorcliQ9%#3 of 12Enterprise
The order flips: MentorcliQ leads at enterprise.
MentorcliQ29%#1 of 8Together18%#3 of 8What the models said about Together
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of five in this category shown.
“What to Avoid on a Tight Budget ... Together Platform: Starts at ~$10,000–$12,000/year” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Major enterprise players like Together, Chronus, and MentorcliQ typically start at $10,000+ per year” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“I want to run an internal program for my company. | Together or MentorcliQ | Strong integrations, automated matching, and robust executive reporting.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Together Platform: Widely considered one of the best for user experience (UX) and ease of use... making it incredibly easy to launch with minimal admin hours.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“Together and Guider are frequently highlighted as top choices because they are easy to set up” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about MentorcliQ
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“What to Avoid on a Tight Budget - MentorcliQ: Starts at ~$9,900/year” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Legacy enterprise tools (like Chronus or MentorcliQ) are often too complex, highly manual to configure, and cost-prohibitive for mid-market budgets.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“MentorcliQ or Chronus: These are top-tier, heavy-duty enterprise platforms... may be slightly overkill—and more expensive” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · soft negative
“Together or MentorcliQ | Strong integrations, automated matching, and robust executive reporting.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best for: Large enterprises... MentorcliQ leads on algorithmic matching quality.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“MentorcliQ and Mentorloop are the top starting points” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Together vs MentorloopTogether vs PushFarTogether vs ChronusTogether vs GuiderTogether vs MentorCityTogether vs QooperMentorloop vs MentorcliQMentorcliQ vs PushFarMentorcliQ vs ChronusMentorcliQ vs GuiderMentorcliQ vs MentorCityMentorcliQ vs QooperAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full mentoring software standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.