Small business▲+4Since September 2026: 18% → 22%, +4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
22%from 18% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 1 of 100, unchanged
11 categories · RankedPin
199Judge labels
49First choices
4Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
11Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
27% in Talent intelligence for mid-market buyers
Rank 1 of 90 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
3 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 26 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Pin →By buyer segmentStrongest at mid-market.
Small business1 of 104
21%30 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market1 of 90
27%26 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise9 of 68
2%5 labels
under the label threshold
In talent intelligence · 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 Pin 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Talent intelligence | Performance and talent management | 27% | 1 of 90 | 0% | 26 | accepted challenger | ▲+11Since September 2026: 17% → 28%, +11 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Recruiting CRM and sourcing | Talent acquisition | 4% | 6 of 111 | 0% | 20 | accepted challenger | ▼−3Since September 2026: 7% → 4%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Candidate assessment | Talent acquisition | 2% | 12 of 118 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by TestGorilla at 52% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now. |
| Skills intelligence | Performance and talent management | 2% | 15 of 127 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Skills Base at 18% | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AI recruiting assistants | Talent acquisition | 0% | 19 of 90 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Manatal at 31% | ▼−10Since September 2026: 10% → 0%, −10 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Video interviewing | Talent acquisition | 0% | 17 of 66 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Spark Hire at 50% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Staffing agency platforms | Talent acquisition | 0% | 31 of 136 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Zoho Recruit at 22% | |
| Interview scheduling | Talent acquisition | 0% | 35 of 75 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 20% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Applicant tracking systems | Talent acquisition | 0% | 33 of 65 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Greenhouse at 40% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Background screening | Talent acquisition | 0% | 50 of 83 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Checkr at 31% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| HR AI assistants | Onboarding and employee experience | 0% | 79 of 142 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by MeBeBot at 21% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Pin held within the floor in all eleven categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Talent intelligence · by segment
Mid-market▲+11Since September 2026: 17% → 28%, +11 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
28%from 17% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 2 pointsRank 1 of 80, unchanged
Enterprise=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 59 → 20 of 63
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Talent intelligence | 17% | 28% | ▲+11Since September 2026: 17% → 28%, +11 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 of 90, unchanged |
| AI recruiting assistants | 10% | 0% | ▼−10Since September 2026: 10% → 0%, −10 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 19 of 90 |
| Recruiting CRM | 7% | 4% | ▼−3Since September 2026: 7% → 4%, −3 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 5 → 6 of 111 |
| Candidate assessment | 0% | 2% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now. | New this edition | Rank 12 of 118, unchanged |
| Skills intelligence | 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 18 → 15 of 127 |
| Video interviewing | 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 17 of 66, unchanged |
| Staffing agency tools | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 31 of 136, unchanged |
| Interview scheduling | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 35 of 75, unchanged |
| Applicant tracking syste | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 33 of 65, unchanged |
| Background screening | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 50 of 83, unchanged |
| HR AI assistants | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 79 of 142, 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 Pin 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 Pin 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 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 8 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 3 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 9 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 9 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 8 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 2 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 9 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
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
Direct38 labels14
Paraphrase16 labels2
Comparative50 labels18not counted in share
Budget-constrained69 labels27
Scale-constrained19 labels6
Negative7 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative199 labels in all, every segment counted; 49 of the 68 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.
“Pin is among the best for external sourcing with the largest multi-source candidate database (850M+ profiles) and pricing starting from $100/mo with a free tier” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Skills intelligence · budget prompt · first choice
“An AI-powered recruiting assistant built for the full top-of-funnel workflow, Pin handles sourcing, outreach, and scheduling from a single dashboard.” Muse Glimmer 30B · AI recruiting assistants · comparative prompt · first choice
“The best talent intelligence platform for a company with a limited budget is Pin, which starts at $100/month and has a free tier.” Llama 4 Maverick · Talent intelligence · budget prompt · first choice
“Pin is widely regarded as one of the most affordable platforms on the market, specifically designed to scale with small teams.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Candidate assessment · budget 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Pin, over the 199 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Pin was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Pin, over the 199 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Pin 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 Pin. 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 199 of the 199 answers that named Pin and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
pin.comYour site196
lever.co69
selectsoftwarereviews.com59
hiretruffle.com56
metaview.ai54
skima.ai54
learn.g2.com50
peoplemanagingpeople.com50
leonar.app48
guideflow.com43
483 of the 679 domain citations in answers naming Pin came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Pin stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Pin stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “talent intelligence platform”
5
Position for “talent intelligence platforms”
4
- Searches for its name, Google
- 368,000 a month (“pin”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 243,385 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 24,375 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 3,069 · 397 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,312
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
27%
rank 1 of 90 in talent intelligence
First choices
49
across its categories
- Named in
- 199 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 199 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 pin.com
564
subdomains included
Content
417
counted in the table below
Documentation
63
Product · Integration
5 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 369 | 18 | 2026-09-16 | ||
| Comparison | 37 | 2 | 2026-07-10 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 7 | 0 | 2026-05-10 | ||
| Case study | 1 | 0 | 2025-09-05 | ||
| Conference or event | 1 | 0 | 2026-04-29 | ||
| Report or ebook | 1 | 0 | 2026-05-25 | ||
| Template or tool | 1 | 0 | 2026-05-01 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-16Pin linkedin update blog
- 2026-09-15Talent preview blog
- 2026-09-12Quick note from Steve (Pin's CEO) - Pin blog
- 2026-08-20Recruitment analytics software blog
- 2026-07-27June 2026 product updates blog
- 2026-07-22Employee tenure funding stage study blog
Events in person
Upcoming
- October 20, 2026 to October 22, 2026HR Tech Conference 2026Mandalay Bay Convention Center, Las Vegas, US
As the event pages on pin.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page pin.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.
Names read as Pin
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Pin; a claim can dispute any of them.
Pin (formerly Pinpoint) 1Pin.com 1
Follow Pin
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
Pin is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Pin is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- AI recruiting platform with candidate sourcing from 850M+ profiles, automated outreach, and interview scheduling.
- For
- recruiters, agencies, and hiring teams
- Price stated
- Free: $0 free forever; Solo: $99 per month, per user, billed annually only on annual billing; Professional: $135 $179 per month, per user, billed annually; Business: Custom pricing for your team pin.com
- Starting price
- 99 pin.com
- Free plan or trial
- Free trial; No credit card required pin.com
- Integrations claimed
- 120 pin.com
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type 2 compliantGDPR & CCPA readySOC 2 Type 2GDPRCCPASOC 2 Type IIPCI DSS
- Hosting
- United States
- Customers named
- SyeloRadarRangeCruit GroupFlip CXLithicExpaStripe
What Pin's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: pin.com, pin.com/pricing, trust.pin.com, pin.com/features/crm, pin.com/customers. 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 Pin'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 Pin, 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 Pin by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Pin 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 Pin, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Pin is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Pin is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideAI models recommend Pin first in Talent intelligence this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.