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 33 → 20 of 77
Orgnostic
18Judge labels
2First choices
1Negative labels
10 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
3% in People analytics for mid-market buyers
Rank 6 of 114 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 10 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Orgnostic →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business19 of 81
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market6 of 114
3%10 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise50 of 79
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
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 Orgnostic 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 | 3% | 6 of 114 | 0% | 10 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Org charts and org design | Workforce planning and analytics | 0% | 72 of 95 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 30% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Orgnostic held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · People analytics · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 14 → 7 of 101
EnterprisenewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 44 of 72, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| People analytics | 2% | 2% | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 14 → 6 of 114 |
| Org charts | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 72 of 95, 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 Orgnostic 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 Orgnostic 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 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 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct1 label1
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative3 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained7 labels1
Negative4 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative18 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 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.
“Crunchr (fast, self‑serve, GDPR‑first) or Orgnostic (turnkey, survey‑focused)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · People analytics · direct prompt · first choice
“For mid-market teams, options often shortlisted are Crunchr, ChartHop, or Orgnostic” Muse Glimmer 30B · People analytics · scale prompt · first choice
“prioritize out-of-the-box, self-service platforms (like *Crunchr* or *Orgnostic*)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · People analytics · negative prompt · first choice
“Orgnostic | Turnkey surveys + lifecycle analytics | You lack dedicated analytics resources” Kimi K2 · People analytics · scale 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 Orgnostic, over the 18 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Orgnostic was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Orgnostic, over the 18 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Orgnostic 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 Orgnostic. 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 16 of the 18 answers that named Orgnostic and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
hr.university11
ordio.com11
workhuman.com10
firsthr.app6
hibob.com6
hrbench.com6
intervue.io6
learn.g2.com6
thrivesparrow.com6
visier.com6
No domain is on file for Orgnostic, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Orgnostic stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Orgnostic stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 20 a month (“orgnostic”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 0 a month
- Its own site
- No site of its own on file, so no site figures
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
3%
rank 6 of 114 in people analytics
Segment leader
22%
Crunchr
- First choices
- 2 across its categories
- Named in
- 18 answers
- Its own site cited
- No site on file to match
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 Orgnostic
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 Orgnostic'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 Orgnostic, 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 Orgnostic by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Orgnostic 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 Orgnostic, 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.