Small business▲+5Since September 2026: 2% → 7%, +5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
7%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 8 → 4 of 108
ChatGPT
61Judge labels
7First choices
27Negative 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
8% in HR AI assistants for mid-market buyers
Rank 6 of 142 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 50% of its 14 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of ChatGPT →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business4 of 121
6%22 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market6 of 142
8%14 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise110 of 110
0%10 labels
criticized challenger
In hr ai assistants · 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 ChatGPT 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR AI assistants | Onboarding and employee experience | 8% | 6 of 142 | 50% | 14 | criticized challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 10% → 9%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Course authoring tools | Learning and development | 0% | 66 of 82 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Articulate 360 at 30% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Employee wellbeing and mental health | Onboarding and employee experience | 0% | 101 of 111 | 100% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Wellable at 22% | =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, ChatGPT held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · HR AI assistants · by segment
Mid-market▼−2Since September 2026: 10% → 9%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
9%from 10% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 3 → 5 of 124
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 82 → 94 of 94
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR AI assistants | 10% | 9% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 10% → 9%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 → 6 of 142 |
| Course authoring tools | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 66 of 82, unchanged |
| Employee wellbeing | 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 74 → 101 of 111 |
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 ChatGPT 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 ChatGPT 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 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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
Direct5 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative3 labelsNone
Budget-constrained20 labels7
Scale-constrained3 labelsNone
Negative30 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative61 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 8 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.
“the best AI assistant for an HR team is usually a general-purpose AI tool like ChatGPT or Claude” Perplexity Sonar · HR AI assistants · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with ChatGPT (free or $20/month) for drafting, answering questions, and content generation” MiniMax M2.5 · HR AI assistants · budget prompt · first choice
“the best starting point is a general-purpose AI like ChatGPT (free tier), Claude, or Google Gemini” Grok 4.1 Fast · HR AI assistants · budget prompt · first choice
“The Top Choice: ChatGPT Plus / Claude Pro” Qwen 3.7 Flash · HR AI assistants · budget prompt · first choice
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.
“Consumer-grade chatbots used for HR-sensitive work, such as the free versions of ChatGPT, Gemini, or Claude, because they are not designed as enterprise HR systems” Perplexity Sonar · HR AI assistants · negative prompt · hard negative
“advise against uploading manuscripts, unpublished work, or confidential corporate information into consumer-facing AI systems like ChatGPT” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Course authoring tools · negative prompt · hard negative
“consumer-grade AI chatbots like the free version of ChatGPT, Gemini, or Claude should be avoided for HR-sensitive tasks” Llama 4 Maverick · HR AI assistants · negative prompt · hard negative
“Do not use generic generative AI assistants (like a basic ChatGPT, Claude, or custom GPTs) to explain company policy” Gemini 3.5 Flash · HR AI assistants · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ChatGPT, over the 61 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ChatGPT was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ChatGPT, over the 61 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ChatGPT 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 ChatGPT. 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 61 answers that named ChatGPT and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
firsthr.app32
gusto.com15
moveworks.com14
peoplemanagingpeople.com14
resources.rework.com14
rippling.com12
humand.co11
theguardian.com11
paychex.com10
shrm.org10
No domain is on file for ChatGPT, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where ChatGPT stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where ChatGPT stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 124,000,000 a month (“chatgpt”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 218,639 a month
- Its own site
- No site of its own on file, so no site figures
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
8%
rank 6 of 142 in HR AI assistants
Segment leader
21%
MeBeBot
- First choices
- 7 across its categories
- Named in
- 61 answers
- Its own site cited
- No site on file to match
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 ChatGPT
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as ChatGPT; a claim can dispute any of them.
ChatGPT (OpenAI) 1ChatGPT (free tier) 1ChatGPT (free) 1ChatGPT Business 1ChatGPT Plus 1ChatGPT Team 1
Follow ChatGPT
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 ChatGPT'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 ChatGPT, 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 ChatGPT by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where ChatGPT 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 ChatGPT, 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.