Small business▲+2Since September 2026: 3% → 5%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
5%from 3% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 6 → 4 of 37
1 category · RankedClair
39Judge labels
4First choices
4Negative labels
10 / 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 Earned wage access for enterprise buyers
Rank 9 of 54 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 9% of its 11 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Clair →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business4 of 38
4%8 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market9 of 54
2%11 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise9 of 55
2%20 labels
accepted challenger
In earned wage access · 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 Clair 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earned wage access | Compensation and total rewards | 2% | 9 of 54 | 9% | 11 | accepted challenger | ▼−5Since September 2026: 7% → 3%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Clair held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Earned wage access · by segment
Mid-market▼−5Since September 2026: 7% → 3%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
3%from 7% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 6 → 9 of 44
Enterprise▲+3Since September 2026: 0% → 3%, +3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
3%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 12 → 9 of 53
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earned wage access | 7% | 3% | ▼−5Since September 2026: 7% → 3%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 6 → 9 of 54 |
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 Clair 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 Clair 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 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct6 labelsNone
Paraphrase8 labels1
Comparative14 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained7 labels3
Scale-constrained3 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative39 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 5 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.
“### 1. Clair (Best for Seamless, Native Integrations)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Earned wage access · budget prompt · first choice
“For platforms and developers, Clair and Branch offer the most flexibility.” Mistral Small · Earned wage access · comparative prompt · alternative
“A platform wanting to embed EWA via API | Clair or Payactiv” Kimi K2 · Earned wage access · comparative prompt · alternative
“Teams that want a simple employee experience and no employer cost” Perplexity Sonar · Earned wage access · paraphrase 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.
“Only makes sense if you're already on BambooHR ... may not scale with mid-market needs” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Earned wage access · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Clair, over the 38 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Clair was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Clair, over the 38 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Clair 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 Clair. 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 38 of the 38 answers that named Clair and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
guideflow.com26
enterprise.chime.com24
dailypay.com22
fintechspecs.com22
g2.com19
pickmysoft.com19
peoplemanagingpeople.com18
us.fitgap.com17
sourceforge.net15
payactiv.com14
196 of the 196 domain citations in answers naming Clair came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
getclair.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Clair takes 2% of first choices and Tapcheck takes 38%.ShowHide
Search and answers
getclair.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Clair takes 2% of first choices and Tapcheck takes 38%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “earned wage access provider”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “earned wage access providers”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 12,100 a month (“clair”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 91,260 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 6,711 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 391 · 75 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,075
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 9 of 54 in earned wage access
Segment leader
38%
Tapcheck
- First choices
- 4 across its categories
- Named in
- 38 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 38 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 getclair.com
16
subdomains included
Content
1
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
6 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-11 to 2026-10 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Webinar or virtual event | 1 | undated |
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page getclair.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 October 5, 2026.
Names read as Clair
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Clair; a claim can dispute any of them.
BambooHR + Clair 1Clair (via BambooHR) 1
Follow Clair
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 Clair'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 Clair, 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 Clair by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Clair 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 Clair, 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.