Small business=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 88 → 19 of 97
6 categories · RankedGlassdoor
72Judge labels
0First choices
40Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
6Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in Job advertising for mid-market buyers
Rank 84 of 111 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 47% of its 15 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Glassdoor →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business23 of 102
0%11 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market84 of 111
0%15 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise86 of 92
0%8 labels
under the label threshold
In job advertising · 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 Glassdoor 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Job advertising and distribution | Talent acquisition | 0% | 84 of 111 | 47% | 15 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Compensation benchmarking data | Compensation and total rewards | 0% | 148 of 148 | 100% | 10 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Compensation management | Compensation and total rewards | 0% | 136 of 140 | 67% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Pave at 18% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Recruiting CRM and sourcing | Talent acquisition | 0% | 75 of 111 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Gem at 15% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Recruitment marketing and career sites | Talent acquisition | 0% | 60 of 104 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Teamtailor at 23% | goneNot named this edition; 2% in September 2026. |
| Staffing agency platforms | Talent acquisition | 0% | 102 of 136 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Zoho Recruit at 22% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Glassdoor held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Job advertising · by segment
Mid-market=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 17 → 60 of 103
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 55 → 83 of 89
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recruitment marketing | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 16 → 60 of 104 |
| Job advertising | 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 17 → 84 of 111 |
| Compensation benchmarkin | 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 134 → 148 of 148 |
| Compensation management | 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 169 → 136 of 140 |
| Recruiting CRM | 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 37 → 75 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 Glassdoor 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 Glassdoor 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 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 |
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
Direct2 labelsNone
Paraphrase6 labelsNone
Comparative23 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained7 labelsNone
Scale-constrained6 labelsNone
Negative28 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative72 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.
“Glassdoor – company research + job search. Best for employer brand transparency.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Job advertising · comparative prompt · alternative
“Stick to vetted alternatives: ... Glassdoor (reviews)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Job advertising · negative prompt · alternative
“Employer branding + jobs; culture-focused candidates” Grok 4.1 Fast · Job advertising · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best for employer reputation research: Glassdoor.” Perplexity Sonar · Job advertising · comparative 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.
“the ones to be most cautious about are free employee-reported salary sites like Glassdoor and Indeed, because their data is unverified” Perplexity Sonar · Compensation management · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid providers that rely heavily on employee self-reporting (like Glassdoor data) or scraped job postings, which are often inflated or inaccurate.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Compensation benchmarkin · scale prompt · hard negative
“Glassdoor (Lowest rated: 1.1/5) - Major concerns: Allegations that negative company reviews are removed for paying employers” Kimi K2 · Job advertising · negative prompt · hard negative
“Relying on them to build official salary bands is highly risky and fails to provide the legally defensible, structured data” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Compensation benchmarkin · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Glassdoor, over the 72 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Glassdoor was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Glassdoor, over the 72 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Glassdoor 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 Glassdoor. 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 66 of the 72 answers that named Glassdoor and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
firsthr.app27
pin.com27
g2.com23
ravio.com23
noon.ai20
linkedin.com19
guideflow.com13
bestjobsearchapps.com12
comprehensive.io12
100hires.com11
187 of the 187 domain citations in answers naming Glassdoor came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
glassdoor.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Glassdoor takes 0% of first choices and JobTarget takes 23%.ShowHide
Search and answers
glassdoor.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Glassdoor takes 0% of first choices and JobTarget takes 23%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “job advertising platforms”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “programmatic job advertising platform”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 550,000 a month (“glassdoor”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 8,378 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 18,924,574 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 2,535,387 · 119,705 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 146,810
- Paid Google search
- 66 searches its ads show for, about 698 clicks and $647 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 84 of 111 in job advertising
Segment leader
23%
JobTarget
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 72 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 66 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.
Names read as Glassdoor
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Glassdoor; a claim can dispute any of them.
Glassdoor & Indeed Salary Tools 1Glassdoor / Total Jobs 1Glassdoor/Indeed 1
Follow Glassdoor
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
Glassdoor is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Glassdoor is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- uses advanced security systems to keep our site safe and prevent misuse or unauthorized access
- Not stated on the pages read
- Who it is for, price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What Glassdoor's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: glassdoor.com. 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 Glassdoor'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 Glassdoor, 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 Glassdoor by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Glassdoor 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 Glassdoor, 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.