Small business▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 11 → 104 of 104
1 category · RankedAdobe Captivate
120Judge labels
2First choices
39Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in Course authoring tools for mid-market buyers
Rank 11 of 82 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 32% of its 47 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Adobe Captivate →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business112 of 112
0%30 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market11 of 82
2%47 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise7 of 96
2%43 labels
accepted challenger
In course authoring tools · 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 Adobe Captivate 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Course authoring tools | Learning and development | 2% | 11 of 82 | 32% | 47 | criticized challenger | ▼−3Since September 2026: 5% → 2%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Adobe Captivate held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Course authoring tools · by segment
Mid-market▼−3Since September 2026: 5% → 2%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 5% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 5 → 10 of 76
Enterprise▼−3Since September 2026: 5% → 2%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 5% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 4 → 7 of 92
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Course authoring tools | 5% | 2% | ▼−3Since September 2026: 5% → 2%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 5 → 11 of 82 |
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 Adobe Captivate 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 Adobe Captivate 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 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct25 labelsNone
Paraphrase8 labelsNone
Comparative30 labelsNone
Budget-constrained15 labels2
Scale-constrained20 labelsNone
Negative22 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative120 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 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.
“If you can spend a modest amount (~$400/year): Go with Adobe Captivate. It's the best price-to-features ratio in the industry.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Course authoring tools · budget prompt · first choice
“Advanced interactions (e.g., software sims), AI features (since 2023), precise control | Steep learning curve, poor native collaboration” Grok 4.1 Fast · Course authoring tools · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best for advanced simulations and immersive/technical learning... often described as more complex and less intuitive for beginners” GPT-5.4 mini · Course authoring tools · comparative prompt · alternative
“The Best for Technical/Software Simulation ... Cons: Expensive; the interface is cluttered and has a steep learning curve.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Course authoring tools · direct 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.
“Google Docs, Adobe Captivate, and Canva are some of the tools that users have expressed concerns about or recommended avoiding.” Llama 4 Maverick · Course authoring tools · negative prompt · hard negative
“This is one of the most frequently flagged tools in practitioner reviews... "a high risk of technical debt"” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Course authoring tools · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid using an unresponsive authoring tool like Storyline or Captivate, as they tend to look rather poor.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Course authoring tools · negative prompt · hard negative
“Tools to Avoid ... or Adobe Captivate” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Course authoring tools · budget prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Adobe Captivate, over the 120 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Adobe Captivate was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Adobe Captivate, over the 120 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Adobe Captivate 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 Adobe Captivate. 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 109 of the 120 answers that named Adobe Captivate and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
elearningindustry.com54
easygenerator.com52
colossyan.com47
ispringsolutions.com47
guideflow.com42
intellum.com41
learnworlds.com29
knowlify.com28
lingio.com23
teachfloor.com23
386 of the 386 domain citations in answers naming Adobe Captivate came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
adobe.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Adobe Captivate takes 2% of first choices and Articulate 360 takes 30%.ShowHide
Search and answers
adobe.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Adobe Captivate takes 2% of first choices and Articulate 360 takes 30%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “authoring tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “elearning authoring tool”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 4,400 a month (“adobe captivate”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 222 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 242,010,966 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 4,156,506 · 1,068,861 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,595,762
- Paid Google search
- 58 searches its ads show for, about 1,090 clicks and $9,855 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 11 of 82 in course authoring tools
Segment leader
30%
Articulate 360
- First choices
- 2 across its categories
- Named in
- 120 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 109 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on adobe.com
24,667
subdomains included
Content
16,205
counted in the table below
Documentation
6,970
Product · Integration
390 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 13,857 | 0 | 2025-06-01 | ||
| Report or ebook | 1,261 | 0 | 2023-10-01 | ||
| Conference or event | 481 | 0 | 2024-01-01 | ||
| Podcast or video | 217 | 0 | 2023-07-01 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 147 | 0 | 2022-10-01 | ||
| Comparison | 82 | 0 | 2022-01-01 | ||
| Case study | 55 | 0 | 2020-11-01 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 52 | 0 | 2023-02-01 | ||
| Template or tool | 40 | 0 | 2023-04-01 | ||
| News or press | 13 | 0 | 2020-04-01 |
Most recent
- 2025-06-01Power up your productivity with latest adobe illustrator release blog
- 2024-01-01Experience all that summit has to offer conference or event
- 2024-01-01Adobes creative impact shines bright 2023 emmy awards blog
- 2024-01-01Haileybury paves new career pathways adobe acrobat sign blog
- 2024-01-01Ai trends 2024 predictions next wave business innovation blog
- 2024-01-01Adobe introduces major new audio updates premiere pro ahead 2024 sundance film festival blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page adobe.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Adobe Captivate
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Adobe Captivate; a claim can dispute any of them.
Captivate 3Captivate (Adobe) 1
Follow Adobe Captivate
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.
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 Adobe Captivate'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 Adobe Captivate, 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 Adobe Captivate by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Adobe Captivate 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 Adobe Captivate, 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.