AI Indexes
HR AI Index
Index › Products › Comprehensive · October 2026 Edition
2 categories · Ranked

Comprehensive

39Judge labels
7First choices
0Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
9% in Compensation management for mid-market buyers
Rank 3 of 140 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
2 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 16 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Comprehensive →
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In compensation management · 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 Comprehensive 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
Compensation managementCompensation and total rewards9%3 of 1400%16accepted challenger▼−5Since September 2026: 15% → 10%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Compensation benchmarking dataCompensation and total rewards0%35 of 1480%2under 10 labels · led by Pave at 19%=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, Comprehensive held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 13 points.

Best category · Compensation management · by segment

Small business▼−2Since September 2026: 7% → 4%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 7% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 5 of 100, unchanged
Mid-market▼−5Since September 2026: 15% → 10%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
10%from 15% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 2 → 3 of 131
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 48 → 35 of 109

All categories · Mid-market

CategorySeptember 2026NowChangeReadingRank
Compensation management15%10%▼−5Since September 2026: 15% → 10%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Within noiseRank 2 → 3 of 140
Compensation benchmarkin0%0%=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Within noiseRank 93 → 35 of 148

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 Comprehensive across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.511002
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash01001
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast13004
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash10102
Llama 4 Maverick00000
Qwen 3.7 Flash01001
Kimi K221104
GLM 4.7 FlashX01102
MiniMax M2.500101
GPT-6 Luna00000
Muse Glimmer 30B00101

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
Direct8 labels3
Paraphrase9 labels2
Comparative7 labelsNone
Budget-constrained6 labelsNone
Scale-constrained7 labels2
Negative2 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative39 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 9 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.

“Prioritize platforms like Comprehensive, Figures.hr, Salary.com CompAnalyst, Paycom, or Ravio, which are frequently recommended for this size” Grok 4.1 Fast · Compensation management · scale prompt · first choice
“Start with Comprehensive if you want an all-in-one platform for salary planning, equity management, and compensation reviews” Kimi K2 · Compensation management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend evaluating Compport and Comprehensive first since both are specifically positioned for mid-market companies.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Compensation management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Comprehensive appears to be the strongest choice” Kimi K2 · Compensation management · direct 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Comprehensive, over the 39 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Comprehensive was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Payscale11 of 391Not among the top eight
Salary.com11 of 391Not among the top eight
beqom10 of 391Not among the top eight
Lattice Compensate10 of 390Not among the top eight
Workday Compensation9 of 390Not among the top eight
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 Comprehensive. 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 39 of the 39 answers that named Comprehensive and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

comprehensive.ioYour site32
ravio.com30
learn.g2.com27
firsthr.app25
g2.com24
peoplemanagingpeople.com20
captivateiq.com19
deel.com17
hibob.com16
fitsmallbusiness.com13

191 of the 223 domain citations in answers naming Comprehensive came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

comprehensive.io ranks 4 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Comprehensive takes 9% of first choices and Pave takes 18%.
ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates
Position for “compensation platforms”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “compensation management software”
–
not in the top ten
Searches for its name, Google
74,000 a month (“comprehensive”)
AI search demand for its name, est.
18,892 a month
Organic visits to its site
about 2,021 a month
Searches its site ranks for
521 · 33 in the top three
Sites linking to it
446
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 edition
Share of first choices
9%
rank 3 of 140 in compensation management
Segment leader
18%
Pave
First choices
7 across its categories
Named in
39 answers
Its own site cited
in 39 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
Addresses on comprehensive.io
30
subdomains included
Content
2
counted in the table below
Documentation
1
Product · Integration
3 · 8
KindPagesLast 90 days2025-10 to 2026-09LatestCategories named
Blog1undated
Glossary or explainer1undatedCompensation management
How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page comprehensive.io 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. Read September 29, 2026.

Follow Comprehensive

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

Comprehensive is its own company.
ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked
Positioning
The AI-powered, fully-customizable compensation platform
Free plan or trial
Free Startup Data comprehensive.io
Certifications
GDPRCCPASOC 2 Type 2
Hosting
USCanada100+ countries
Customers named
Linux FoundationHopSkipDriveVGW
Not stated on the pages read
Price, starting price

What Comprehensive's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: comprehensive.io, comprehensive.io/products/benchmarking. 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 Comprehensive'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 Comprehensive, 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 Comprehensive by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

  • where Comprehensive 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 Comprehensive, 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.
The subscriber app

A verification link goes to your work email; an address at comprehensive.io is approved on the spot, any other is reviewed by hand. Your email is never published. Claiming gives no say over labels, shares, verdicts or which quotes appear.

Badges

Wins only: a badge exists where Comprehensive is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHide

Comprehensive is among the products AI models recommend first in Compensation management this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.

Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Among AI models' top three in Compensation management, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index
Show the code
<a href="https://hr-ai-index.com/rewards/compensation-management/"><img src="https://hr-ai-index.com/badges/2026-10/comprehensive--compensation-management-wide.svg" alt="Among AI models' top three in Compensation management, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index" width="320" height="104"></a>

Copy the code as it is. The link is part of the badge: it points at the Compensation management standing, where the claim can be checked.

Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Among AI models' top three in Compensation management, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index
Show the code
<a href="https://hr-ai-index.com/rewards/compensation-management/"><img src="https://hr-ai-index.com/badges/2026-10/comprehensive--compensation-management-square.svg" alt="Among AI models' top three in Compensation management, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index" width="240" height="240"></a>

Copy the code as it is. The link is part of the badge: it points at the Compensation management standing, where the claim can be checked.

Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Among AI models' top three in Compensation management, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index
Show the code
<a href="https://hr-ai-index.com/rewards/compensation-management/"><img src="https://hr-ai-index.com/badges/2026-10/comprehensive--compensation-management-compact.svg" alt="Among AI models' top three in Compensation management, October 2026 Edition, HR AI Recommendation Index" width="200" height="56"></a>

Copy the code as it is. The link is part of the badge: it points at the Compensation management standing, where the claim can be checked.

Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.