Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 57 → 19 of 68
Acuity · 3 categories · RankedAcuity Scheduling
62Judge labels
1First choices
22Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in Workforce scheduling for mid-market buyers
Rank 16 of 108 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 22% of its 18 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Acuity Scheduling →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business19 of 69
0%12 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market16 of 108
0%18 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise131 of 135
0%9 labels
under the label threshold
In workforce scheduling · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Acuity Scheduling for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Workforce scheduling | Core HR and payroll | 0% | 16 of 108 | 22% | 18 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Interview scheduling | Talent acquisition | 0% | 27 of 75 | 25% | 8 | under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 20% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Coaching platforms | Learning and development | 0% | 124 of 128 | 100% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Growthspace at 20% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Acuity Scheduling held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Workforce scheduling · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 16 of 99, unchanged
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 114 → 117 of 122
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Workforce scheduling | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 16 of 108, unchanged |
| Interview scheduling | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 72 → 27 of 75 |
| Coaching platforms | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 42 → 124 of 128 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 13 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Acuity Scheduling across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Acuity Scheduling across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct6 labelsNone
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative29 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labelsNone
Scale-constrained2 labels1
Negative20 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative62 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Best for Service Businesses ... Run a service business requiring deposits/payments? → Acuity Scheduling” Kimi K2 · Workforce scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative
“Owned by Squarespace, so it's more focused on service businesses than pure recruiting workflows” Mistral Small · Interview scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative
“Choose Acuity if you need to accept money or manage bookings for a physical service.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Workforce scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative
“The heavyweight for independent service providers, coaches, and freelancers.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Workforce scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
“it breaks down quickly as scheduling complexity increases, and it's not suitable for larger groups managing complex shifts” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Workforce scheduling · negative prompt · hard negative
“an unsecured API exposed sensitive customer data ... the history of a misconfiguration is a red flag” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Workforce scheduling · negative prompt · hard negative
“This tool can feel overbuilt for hiring needs—its strength in advanced configuration is also its biggest drawback” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Interview scheduling · negative prompt · soft negative
“It has no session notes, no goal tracking, no client accountability features and no CPD logging” Muse Glimmer 30B · Coaching platforms · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Acuity Scheduling, over the 62 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Acuity Scheduling was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Acuity Scheduling, over the 62 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Acuity Scheduling was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Acuity Scheduling. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 61 of the 62 answers that named Acuity Scheduling and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
cal.com28
calendly.com22
firsthr.app22
capterra.com21
agiled.app19
koalendar.com19
lever.co16
lunacal.ai15
peoplemanagingpeople.com15
joinhomebase.com14
191 of the 191 domain citations in answers naming Acuity Scheduling came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
acuityscheduling.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Acuity Scheduling takes 0% of first choices and Deputy takes 37%.ShowHide
Search and answers
acuityscheduling.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Acuity Scheduling takes 0% of first choices and Deputy takes 37%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “scheduling tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “employee scheduling software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 90,500 a month (“acuity scheduling”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 288 a month
- Its company's site
- acuityscheduling.com shared with Acuity's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 926,226 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 195,031 · 6,191 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 77,125
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 16 of 108 in workforce scheduling
Segment leader
37%
Deputy
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 62 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 61 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
Names read as Acuity Scheduling
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Acuity Scheduling; a claim can dispute any of them.
Acuity 2Acuity Scheduling (by Squarespace) 1
Follow Acuity Scheduling
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Acuity is the company behind Acuity Scheduling.ShowHide
The company
Acuity is the company behind Acuity Scheduling.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Manage your schedule and get paid with Acuity’s mobile app
- For
- businesses, whether you are a solo entrepreneur, a multi-location business, or managing schedules across your staff
- Price stated
- Download the Acuity Scheduling mobile app for free today. acuityscheduling.com/features/mobile-app
- Starting price
- 16 acuityscheduling.com/compare/acuity-vs-vagaro
- Free plan or trial
- free trial period acuityscheduling.com/features/mobile-app
- Customers named
- A Little GellyVital Massage & BodyworkA.M. Guest HouseHomemade SocialR Accounting GroupPermaestheticsBig Apple BallroomCARLINCUTS
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, certifications, hosting
What Acuity Scheduling's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: acuityscheduling.com/features/mobile-app, acuityscheduling.com/features/online-booking, acuityscheduling.com/compare/acuity-vs-vagaro, acuityscheduling.com/features/how-acuity-works, acuityscheduling.com/features/class-scheduling. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Acuity Scheduling's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Acuity Scheduling, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Acuity Scheduling by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Acuity Scheduling is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Acuity Scheduling, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.