| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recruiting CRM and sourcing | Talent acquisition | 15% | 1 of 111 | 3% | 30 | accepted challenger | ▼−3Since September 2026: 18% → 15%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Talent intelligence | Performance and talent management | 14% | 2 of 90 | 8% | 24 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 15% → 16%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Recruitment marketing and career sites | Talent acquisition | 7% | 5 of 104 | 8% | 12 | accepted challenger | ▲+4Since September 2026: 2% → 6%, +4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AI recruiting assistants | Talent acquisition | 6% | 5 of 90 | 0% | 13 | accepted challenger | ▲+5Since September 2026: 2% → 7%, +5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Interview scheduling | Talent acquisition | 2% | 15 of 75 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 20% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Applicant tracking systems | Talent acquisition | 0% | 17 of 65 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Greenhouse at 40% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Staffing agency platforms | Talent acquisition | 0% | 30 of 136 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Zoho Recruit at 22% |
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI recruiting assistants | 2% | 7% | ▲+5Since September 2026: 2% → 7%, +5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 10 → 5 of 90 |
| Recruitment marketing | 2% | 6% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 2% → 6%, +4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 12 → 5 of 104 |
| Recruiting CRM | 18% | 15% | ▼−3Since September 2026: 18% → 15%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 2 → 1 of 111 |
| Interview scheduling | 4% | 2% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 10 → 15 of 75 |
| Talent intelligence | 15% | 16% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 15% → 16%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 2 of 90, unchanged |
| Applicant tracking syste | 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 29 → 17 of 65 |
| Staffing agency tools | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 30 of 136, unchanged |
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
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 6 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 14 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 10 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 7 |
| Mistral Small | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 10 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 6 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 3 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 9 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 8 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Gem is the best overall due to its strong automation, CRM, and AI features, as well as its high user satisfaction and mid-market focus.” Mistral Small · Recruitment marketing · direct prompt · first choice
“Gem (formerly HireEZ) is widely considered the best all-around candidate sourcing tool for this specific size and sector today.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Recruiting CRM · direct prompt · first choice
“Gem is widely considered the best option for small businesses because they have a specific pricing tier designed to help you grow” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Talent intelligence · budget prompt · first choice
“Look for modern, agile platforms (such as Gem, Clinch, or Teamtailor) where implementation takes weeks, not quarters.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Recruitment marketing · scale prompt · first choice
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.
“faces integration issues with some third-party systems and occasionally has UI and workflow clunkiness” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Talent intelligence · negative prompt · hard negative
“premium enterprise platforms like LinkedIn Recruiter Corporate, Gem, or hireEZ can cost thousands of dollars annually per seat” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Recruiting CRM · budget prompt · soft negative
“positioned more for outbound recruiting and pipeline management than broad talent intelligence” Perplexity Sonar · Talent intelligence · budget prompt · soft negative
“they may not be beneficial if your recruitment pipelines are already cold or inactive” Mistral Small · Recruitment marketing · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 209 of the 221 answers that named Gem and are not a share of its labels.
642 of the 705 domain citations in answers naming Gem came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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.
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 317 | 1 | 2026-08-04 | ||
| Report or ebook | 34 | 0 | 2025-10-22 | ||
| Comparison | 28 | 0 | 2026-01-14 | ||
| Case study | 25 | 0 | 2026-06-09 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 20 | 0 | 2026-02-27 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 19 | 2 | 2026-08-06 | ||
| Conference or event | 10 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 5 | 0 | 2026-01-07 | ||
| News or press | 1 | undated |
Every page gem.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.
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.
What Gem's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: gem.com, gem.com/pricing, trust.gem.com, gem.com/product/crm, gem.com/company/customers. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Gem'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 Gem, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Gem by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
AI models recommend Gem first in Recruiting CRM and sourcing 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.
Gem is among the products AI models recommend first in Talent intelligence 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.
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.