Small business▼−4Since September 2026: 4% → 0%, −4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 7 → 16 of 69
3 categories · RankedOrgChart
89Judge labels
8First choices
10Negative labels
14 / 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.
Best standing
7% in Org charts for enterprise buyers
Rank 6 of 95 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 15% of its 26 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of OrgChart →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business16 of 72
0%15 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market6 of 95
6%26 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise5 of 86
7%42 labels
accepted challenger
In org charts · 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 OrgChart 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Org charts and org design | Workforce planning and analytics | 6% | 6 of 95 | 15% | 26 | accepted challenger | ▼−5Since September 2026: 12% → 7%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Workforce planning | Workforce planning and analytics | 2% | 15 of 98 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 37% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Succession planning | Performance and talent management | 0% | 51 of 93 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Lattice at 28% | =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, OrgChart held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Org charts · by segment
Mid-market▼−5Since September 2026: 12% → 7%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
7%from 12% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 4 → 5 of 90
Enterprise▼−5Since September 2026: 11% → 6%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
6%from 11% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 3 → 5 of 80
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Org charts | 12% | 7% | ▼−5Since September 2026: 12% → 7%, −5 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 6 of 95 |
| Workforce planning | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 31 → 15 of 98 |
| Succession planning | 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 51 of 93, 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 OrgChart 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 OrgChart 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 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
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
Direct15 labels3
Paraphrase8 labels2
Comparative22 labels5not counted in share
Budget-constrained13 labels1
Scale-constrained21 labels2
Negative10 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative89 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 of the 13 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.
“I'd recommend OrgChart if your main need is a practical, easy-to-adopt organizational design and org-chart tool” GPT-5.4 mini · Org charts · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For most small businesses with limited budgets, Planday, OrgChart, or Leapsome would be good starting points.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Workforce planning · budget prompt · first choice
“described as a leading org chart automation and workforce planning solution built for HR professionals” Muse Glimmer 30B · Org charts · comparative prompt · first choice
“Org Chart Software (like Lucidchart, OrgChart, or Miro) - Best for visualizing hierarchy” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Org charts · paraphrase prompt · first choice
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.
“Reviews mention steep learning curves, complexity, or clunky directory experiences in certain products. ([g2.com](https://www.g2.com/products/orgchart/reviews” GPT-5.4 mini · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative
“Steep learning curve — users report feeling "overwhelmed by inconsistent training and complex features"” Kimi K2 · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative
“Interface is dated and not intuitive for average users ... Clunky administration for making changes” MiniMax M2.5 · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative
“OrgChart requires significant time for initial setup and integration configuration” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as OrgChart, over the 87 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OrgChart was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as OrgChart, over the 87 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OrgChart 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 OrgChart. 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 78 of the 87 answers that named OrgChart and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
theorgchart.com43
onedirectory.com39
g2.com33
teamohana.com31
orgchartstudio.comYour site27
forbes.com26
gitnux.org26
venngage.com25
firsthr.app24
guideflow.com24
271 of the 298 domain citations in answers naming OrgChart came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
orgchartstudio.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, OrgChart takes 6% of first choices and ChartHop takes 30%.ShowHide
Search and answers
orgchartstudio.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, OrgChart takes 6% of first choices and ChartHop takes 30%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “org chart tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “org chart software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 33,100 a month (“orgchart”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 5 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 428 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 293 · 0 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 165
- 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 95 in org charts
Segment leader
30%
ChartHop
- First choices
- 8 across its categories
- Named in
- 87 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 78 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 orgchartstudio.com
81
subdomains included
Content
59
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 52 | 31 | 2026-09-19 | Org charts | |
| Comparison | 7 | 0 | 2026-06-16 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-19How to change org chart colors blog
- 2026-09-13How to use org chart studio agent api blog
- 2026-09-12Account data and support help blog
- 2026-09-12Flat organizations still have hierarchies blog
- 2026-09-12How to add edit delete people blog
- 2026-09-12How to build org chart from gusto blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page orgchartstudio.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. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as OrgChart
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as OrgChart; a claim can dispute any of them.
OrgChart Now 4OrgChart (OfficeWork) 1OrgChart (by OfficeWork Software) 1OrgChart (by Organic Charts) 1OrgChart (by The Org) 1OrgChart (now OrgWeaver) 1OrgChart (orgchartpro.com) 1OrgChart (theorgchart.com) 1OrgChart / Orgvue 1OrgChart Now / OrgChart.com 1OrgChart by OrgChart Inc. 1OrgChart.com 1
Follow OrgChart
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
OrgChart is its own company.ShowHide
The company
OrgChart is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Create professional org charts in minutes, not meetings.
- For
- teams
- Price stated
- Free forever for core editing; paid passes unlock PowerPoint, PDF, and watermark-free PNGs. orgchartstudio.com
- Starting price
- 0 orgchartstudio.com
- Free plan or trial
- Free means free to build and store. Keep 10 charts with up to 2,500 people in each, import Excel or CSV files, and use auto-layout. Watermarked PNG export is free for charts up to 250 people. CSV stays free. orgchartstudio.com
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What OrgChart's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: orgchartstudio.com, orgchartstudio.com/pricing. 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 OrgChart'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 OrgChart, 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 OrgChart by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where OrgChart 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 OrgChart, 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.