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 38 → 34 of 83
3 categories · Named, not rankedHubEngage
13Judge labels
2First choices
0Negative labels
7 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
4 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. HubEngage was named 4 times in Internal communications and 2 other categories, where Microsoft Teams led with 14%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market36 of 86
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise12 of 92
3%3 labels
under the label threshold
In internal communications · 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 HubEngage 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal communications and intranet | Onboarding and employee experience | 0% | 36 of 86 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Teams at 14% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Frontline employee apps | Onboarding and employee experience | 0% | 51 of 106 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Connecteam at 49% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Workforce scheduling | Core HR and payroll | 0% | 69 of 108 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Deputy at 37% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, HubEngage held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Internal communications · by segment
Enterprise▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 44 → 16 of 87
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal communications | 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 38 → 36 of 86 |
| Frontline employee apps | 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 22 → 51 of 106 |
| Workforce scheduling | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 69 of 108, 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
By model
How each model treated HubEngage 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 HubEngage 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 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative2 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labels2
Scale-constrained4 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative13 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.
“HubEngage | Multi-channel reach, frontline support” Kimi K2 · Internal communications · scale prompt · alternative
“HubEngage or Firstup are excellent choices” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Internal communications · 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 HubEngage, over the 13 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HubEngage was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as HubEngage, over the 13 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HubEngage 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 HubEngage. 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 13 of the 13 answers that named HubEngage and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
mangoapps.com8
hubengage.comYour site7
joinblink.com7
turnonwork.com7
guideflow.com6
oak.com5
workvivo.com5
agilityportal.io4
firsthr.app4
staffbase.com4
Fifty of the fifty-seven domain citations in answers naming HubEngage came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
hubengage.com ranks 4 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, HubEngage takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Teams takes 14%.ShowHide
Search and answers
hubengage.com ranks 4 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, HubEngage takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Teams takes 14%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “employee intranet”
4
Position for “intranet platforms”
–
not in the top ten
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 36 of 86 in internal communications
Segment leader
14%
Microsoft Teams
- First choices
- 2 across its categories
- Named in
- 13 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 13 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 hubengage.com
699
subdomains included
Content
166
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
12 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 83 | 0 | 2026-03-31 | ||
| News or press | 25 | 0 | 2022-03-17 | ||
| Report or ebook | 16 | 0 | 2026-05-12 | ||
| Comparison | 10 | 0 | 2026-04-14 | ||
| Case study | 9 | 0 | 2025-10-23 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 9 | 0 | 2024-08-01 | ||
| Podcast or video | 6 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 4 | 0 | 2026-06-16 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 4 | 2 | 2026-08-03 |
Most recent
- 2026-08-03What is workforce analytics glossary or explainer
- 2026-07-10What is organizational communication glossary or explainer
- 2026-06-29What is preboarding glossary or explainer
- 2026-06-16Unified employee platform roi calculator template or tool
- 2026-05-12Workforce management report or ebook
- 2026-04-30Task management software report or ebook
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page hubengage.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.
Follow HubEngage
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
HubEngage is its own company.ShowHide
The company
HubEngage is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Unified Multi-Channel Employee Engagement Platform
- For
- HR leaders, Internal Communications teams, Employee Engagement leaders, and Operations teams
- Price stated
- USD 1500 hubengage.com
- Starting price
- 1500 hubengage.com
- Not stated on the pages read
- Free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What HubEngage's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: hubengage.com, trust.hubengage.com, hubengage.com/platform-integrations. 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 HubEngage'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 HubEngage, 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 HubEngage by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where HubEngage 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 HubEngage, 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.