Small businessgoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsNot ranked
1 category · Named, not rankedLeverTRM
3Judge labels
1First choices
0Negative labels
2 / 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.
Standing
1 label, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. LeverTRM was named 1 time in People analytics, where Crunchr led with 22%. 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-market71 of 114
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In people analytics · 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 LeverTRM 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| People analytics | Workforce planning and analytics | 0% | 71 of 114 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Crunchr at 22% | =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, LeverTRM held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · People analytics · 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 50 → 62 of 101
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| People analytics | 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 50 → 71 of 114 |
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 LeverTRM 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 LeverTRM 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | 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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase1 label1
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 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.
No positive label carried a quote.
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 LeverTRM, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LeverTRM was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LeverTRM, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LeverTRM 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 LeverTRM. 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 1 of the 3 answers that named LeverTRM and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
bullhorn.com1
citehawk.com1
darwinbox.com1
forbes.com1
fountain.com1
greenhouse.com1
herohunt.ai1
lever.coYour site1
lifthcm.com1
metaview.ai1
Nine of the ten domain citations in answers naming LeverTRM came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
lever.co is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, LeverTRM takes 0% of first choices and Crunchr takes 22%.ShowHide
Search and answers
lever.co is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, LeverTRM takes 0% of first choices and Crunchr takes 22%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “people analytics platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “people analytics platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Organic visits to its site
- about 189,552 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 20,989 · 1,917 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 25,675
- Paid Google search
- 3 searches its ads show for, about 17 clicks and $657 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 71 of 114 in people analytics
Segment leader
22%
Crunchr
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 3 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 1 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 lever.co
662
subdomains included
Content
375
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
8 · 1
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 328 | 2 | 2026-09-09 | ||
| Case study | 24 | 1 | 2026-08-06 | ||
| Comparison | 19 | 6 | 2026-08-26 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 3 | 0 | 2023-01-21 | ||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-09Ai candidate screening blog
- 2026-09-08Ai resume screening blog
- 2026-08-26Best lever alternatives comparison
- 2026-08-24Best icims alternatives comparison
- 2026-08-14Best linkedin recruiter alternatives comparison
- 2026-08-13Bots vs bots what happens when candidates and employers both use ai comparison
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page lever.co 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.
Names read as LeverTRM
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as LeverTRM; a claim can dispute any of them.
Lever/TRG 1
Follow LeverTRM
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
LeverTRM is its own company.ShowHide
The company
LeverTRM is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- AI-Powered Hiring Platform
- For
- small, mid-sized and enterprise organizations
- Price stated
- Lever offers customized pricing based on your company size, hiring volume, feature needs, and implementation requirements. lever.co
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type IISOC 2 Type 2ISO/IEC 27001
- Hosting
- US-West2EU-Central1
- Customers named
- NextGen Federal SystemsEnablecompBisnowEmma Sleep GmbHTalendLucidworksRoyal AmbulanceDREAM Charter Schools
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial, integrations
What LeverTRM's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: lever.co, lever.co/pricing, lever.co/security, lever.co/solutions/dei, lever.co/case-studies. 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 LeverTRM'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 LeverTRM, 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 LeverTRM by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where LeverTRM 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 LeverTRM, 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.