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 39 → 17 of 50
Guider
32Judge labels
3First choices
0Negative labels
11 / 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
6% in Mentoring software for mid-market buyers
Rank 6 of 77 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 14 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Guider →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business18 of 54
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market6 of 77
6%14 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise11 of 44
0%14 labels
accepted challenger
In mentoring software · 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 Guider 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentoring software | Learning and development | 6% | 6 of 77 | 0% | 14 | accepted challenger | ▲+6Since September 2026: 0% → 6%, +6 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Guider held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Mentoring software · by segment
Mid-market▲+6Since September 2026: 0% → 6%, +6 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
6%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 14 → 5 of 74
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 9 → 10 of 43
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentoring software | 0% | 6% | ▲+6Since September 2026: 0% → 6%, +6 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 14 → 6 of 77 |
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 Guider 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 Guider 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 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
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 labels1
Paraphrase8 labels2
Comparative14 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained3 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative32 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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 mentoring program software for a mid-market B2B company includes MentorCity, Together Corporate Mentorship, Qooper, and Guider.” Llama 4 Maverick · Mentoring software · direct prompt · first choice
“I would recommend Guider if you want the best balance of ease of launch, affordability, and enough structure” Perplexity Sonar · Mentoring software · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Together and Guider are frequently highlighted as top choices” Mistral Small · Mentoring software · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Offers a straightforward, affordable mentoring platform aimed at mid-sized companies launching their first structured mentoring program” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Mentoring software · 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Guider, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Guider was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Guider, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Guider 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 Guider. 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 31 of the 32 answers that named Guider and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
qooper.io24
chronus.com21
mentorcliq.com17
g2.com15
growthmentor.com13
guideflow.com13
getapp.com12
peoplemanagingpeople.com12
intervue.io10
togetherplatform.com10
147 of the 147 domain citations in answers naming Guider came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
guider-ai.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Guider takes 6% of first choices and Together takes 28%.ShowHide
Search and answers
guider-ai.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Guider takes 6% of first choices and Together takes 28%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “mentoring platforms”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “mentoring program software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 880 a month (“guider”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 65 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 2,293 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 552 · 2 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,245
- 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
6%
rank 6 of 77 in mentoring software
Segment leader
28%
Together
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 32 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 31 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.
Follow Guider
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 Guider'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 Guider, 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 Guider by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Guider 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 Guider, 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.