Small businessnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 44 of 69, unchanged
1 category · Named, not rankedOrgChartHub
6Judge labels
1First choices
0Negative labels
6 / 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
5 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. OrgChartHub was named 5 times in Org charts, where ChartHop led with 30%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business47 of 72
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Mid-market10 of 95
2%5 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
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 OrgChartHub 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 | 2% | 10 of 95 | 0% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 30% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, OrgChartHub held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Org charts · by segment
Mid-market▲+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 24 → 11 of 90
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Org charts | 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 24 → 10 of 95 |
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 OrgChartHub 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 OrgChartHub 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
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
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative6 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.
“OrgChartHub and Pingboard are top choices due to their ease of use, integration capabilities” Mistral Small · Org charts · direct prompt · first choice
“OrgChartHub is ranked as the best HubSpot-native tool for mid-market teams” Muse Glimmer 30B · Org charts · direct prompt · alternative
“Best for HubSpot-based sales/account mapping: OrgChartHub” Perplexity Sonar · Org charts · direct 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 OrgChartHub, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OrgChartHub was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as OrgChartHub, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OrgChartHub 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 OrgChartHub. 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 6 of the 6 answers that named OrgChartHub and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
apollo.io6
forbes.com6
getapp.com5
gitnux.org5
connecteam.com3
worldmetrics.org3
firsthr.app2
g2.com2
guideflow.com2
hr-ai-index.com2
Thirty-six of the thirty-six domain citations in answers naming OrgChartHub came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Follow OrgChartHub
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
OrgChartHub is its own company.ShowHide
The company
OrgChartHub is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Build Org Charts in HubSpot CRM
- For
- HubSpot customers, sales teams, account-based selling, enterprise accounts, ABM, account planning, sales leaders
- Free plan or trial
- free version orgcharthub.com
- Certifications
- HubSpot Certified App Partner
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, integrations, hosting, customers
What OrgChartHub's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: orgcharthub.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 OrgChartHub'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 OrgChartHub, 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 OrgChartHub by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where OrgChartHub 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 OrgChartHub, 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.