Compensation benchmarking data · October 2026 Edition
Comprehensive.io vs Radford
Zero of fourteen models named Comprehensive.io first on the direct prompt; zero named Radford. Comprehensive.io was named by ten of the fourteen models and Radford by twelve and Comprehensive.io carries 10 labels and Radford 28, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in three categories this edition.
Radford
criticized challengerNamed in three categories this edition.
First-choice share7%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%50%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#6#7A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1028A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Comprehensive.io reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Pave was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Pave vs Comprehensive.io · Pave vs Radford · Payscale vs Comprehensive.io
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 compensation benchmarking data page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Comprehensive.ioFirst choices, of fourteen modelsRadfordDirect003 against Radford
Paraphrase023 against Radford
Comparative00
Budget-constrained412 against Radford
Scale-constrained002 against Radford
Negative004 against Radford
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.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Comprehensive.io and Radford stood in it.
| Model | DirectRA | ParaphraseRA | ComparativeRA | Budget-constrainedRA | Scale-constrainedRA | NegativeRA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | RA | RA | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | RA | RA | RA | |||
| Perplexity Sonar | | RA | ||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | RA | | ||||
| Mistral Small | RA | RA | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | RA | RA | | RA | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | | |||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | RA | RA | RA | RA | ||
| Kimi K2 | RA | RA | ||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | |||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | RA | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | RA | |||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | RA |
Comprehensive.ioRA Radford first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Comprehensive.io on the left and Radford on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Comprehensive.io and Radford stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniPayscale alternatives: Mercer Total Remuneration Survey, Radford, WTW
GPT-6 LunaPave alternatives: Mercer Total Remuneration Survey, Payscale, Radford
Neither was named
12 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Payscale alternatives: Comprehensive, Lattice, Pave, SalaryCube
Gemini 3.5 FlashPave alternatives: Figures, Payscale, Ravio, RepVue, Salary.com CompAnalyst
Perplexity SonarRavio alternatives: CompUp, Pave, Payfactors, Payscale Ascent, Salary.com CompAnalyst
Grok 4.1 FastSalaryCube alternatives: Payscale, Salary.com CompAnalyst
Mistral SmallRavio, SalaryCube alternatives: CompUp, Figures
DeepSeek V4 FlashPayscale alternatives: Pave, Salary.com CompAnalyst
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashLattice alternatives: Comprehensive, Deel HR, Pave, SalaryCube
Kimi K2Payscale, SalaryCube alternatives: Figures, Pave, Ravio, Salary.com CompAnalyst
GLM 4.7 FlashXPave, Payscale Ascent alternatives: Figures, Salary.com CompAnalyst
MiniMax M2.5SalaryCube alternatives: CompUp, Lattice, Salary.com CompAnalyst
Muse Glimmer 30BSalaryCube alternatives: Pave, Salary.com CompAnalyst
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
Comprehensive.io leads by eight points.
Comprehensive.io8%#3 of 9Radford0%#9 of 9
The full small business standing →Mid-marketThe figures above
Comprehensive.io leads by two points.
Comprehensive.io7%#6 of 13Radford5%#7 of 13
The full mid-market standing →Enterprise
The order flips: Radford leads at enterprise.
Radford16%#2 of 12
Comprehensive.io0%#– of 12What the models said about Comprehensive.io
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“starting with free tools like Pave's free tier, Comprehensive.io, or the BLS is recommended” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“use Pave, Comprehensive.io, or Ravio (free tiers) for deeper, role‑specific insights” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“Pave Market Data Lite (free) or Comprehensive.io (free)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Radford
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of six in this category shown.
“"Why you should avoid traditional providers (Mercer, Radford, Willis Towers Watson)"” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · hard negative
“incredibly robust but requires manual survey participation, a higher budget, and more administrative effort than modern API-based systems” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“$15K–$80K+/yr with mandatory survey participation. Overkill for most mid-market B2B unless you're in tech/life sciences specifically.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · soft negative
“This makes Radford a top pick for companies looking for reliable, free salary benchmarking data without a significant financial investment.” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
“Radford or Mercer are the top choices due to their industry-specific data and reliability” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“1. Radford (Aon) — *Best for B2B Tech/SaaS*” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared
Pave vs Comprehensive.ioPave vs RadfordPayscale vs Comprehensive.ioPayscale vs RadfordSalaryCube vs Comprehensive.ioSalaryCube vs RadfordSalary.com CompAnalyst vs Comprehensive.ioSalary.com CompAnalyst vs RadfordRavio vs Comprehensive.ioRavio vs RadfordComprehensive.io vs Mercer Total Remuneration SurveyRadford vs Mercer Total Remuneration SurveyAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full compensation benchmarkin 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.