Small business▲+6Since September 2026: 2% → 9%, +6 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
9%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 6 → 3 of 50
2 categories · RankedQooper
140Judge labels
20First choices
20Negative labels
14 / 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
25% in Mentoring software for enterprise buyers
Rank 9 of 77 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 5% of its 38 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Qooper →By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
Small business4 of 54
8%40 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market9 of 77
4%38 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise2 of 44
25%55 labels
accepted challenger
In mentoring software · 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 Qooper 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentoring software | Learning and development | 4% | 9 of 77 | 5% | 38 | accepted challenger | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Succession planning | Performance and talent management | 0% | 29 of 93 | 0% | 6 | 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, Qooper held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Mentoring software · by segment
Mid-market▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 13 → 7 of 74
Enterprise▼−2Since September 2026: 29% → 27%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
27%from 29% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 1 → 2 of 43
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentoring software | 0% | 4% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 13 → 9 of 77 |
| 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 35 → 29 of 93 |
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 Qooper 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 Qooper 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 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 6 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
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
Direct34 labels4
Paraphrase25 labels11
Comparative33 labels8not counted in share
Budget-constrained19 labels2
Scale-constrained19 labels3
Negative10 labels3not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative140 labels in all, every segment counted; 20 of the 31 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.
“Qooper: Combines AI-powered mentor matching, advanced analytics with a built-in ROI calculator, extensive enterprise integrations, and support for every major mentoring format.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Mentoring software · comparative prompt · first choice
“The best mentoring program software for a mid-market B2B company includes MentorCity, Together Corporate Mentorship, Qooper, and Guider.” Llama 4 Maverick · Mentoring software · direct prompt · first choice
“Strong on structured programs, analytics, ROI reporting, and learning/development tracking” Perplexity Sonar · Mentoring software · comparative prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend Together Corporate Mentorship or Qooper as the top choices” MiniMax M2.5 · Mentoring software · 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.
“though it is often positioned more toward enterprises and larger organizations” Perplexity Sonar · Mentoring software · direct prompt · soft negative
“priced for large organizations and are not suitable for a tight budget” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Mentoring software · budget prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Qooper, over the 140 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Qooper was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Qooper, over the 140 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Qooper 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 Qooper. 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 140 of the 140 answers that named Qooper and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
qooper.ioYour site111
chronus.com70
guideflow.com68
growthmentor.com65
g2.com64
togetherplatform.com58
peoplemanagingpeople.com57
mentorcliq.com56
getapp.com47
softwareadvice.com44
529 of the 640 domain citations in answers naming Qooper came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
qooper.io ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Qooper takes 4% of first choices and Together takes 28%.ShowHide
Search and answers
qooper.io ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Qooper takes 4% of first choices and Together takes 28%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “mentoring platforms”
1
Position for “mentoring program software”
9
- Searches for its name, Google
- 720 a month (“qooper”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 0 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 144,826 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 5,481 · 1,457 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,779
- Paid Google search
- 5 searches its ads show for, about 21 clicks and $318 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
4%
rank 9 of 77 in mentoring software
Segment leader
28%
Together
- First choices
- 20 across its categories
- Named in
- 140 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 140 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 qooper.io
830
subdomains included
Content
524
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
1 · 5
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 413 | 63 | 2026-09-16 | Mentoring software, Succession planning | |
| Template or tool | 30 | 0 | 2026-02-25 | Employee onboarding, Mentoring software | |
| Case study | 22 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 17 | 1 | 2026-09-09 | Mentoring software | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 16 | undated | Employee onboarding | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 16 | 0 | 2025-09-26 | Performance management, Succession planning | |
| Report or ebook | 10 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-16Best in class mentoring software blog
- 2026-09-16Scaling enterprise mentoring blog
- 2026-09-15Ai mentor matching blog
- 2026-09-15Ai personalized mentoring for retention risk blog
- 2026-09-14Enterprise mentoring software implementation blog
- 2026-09-14How much administrative work enterprise mentoring software eliminates blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page qooper.io 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.
Follow Qooper
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
Qooper is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Qooper is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Enterprise Mentoring Software for Employee Development at Scale
- For
- HR, L&D and Talent teams
- Price stated
- Request Pricing qooper.io/pricing
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type II certifiedGDPR compliantSOC II CertifiedGDPR ReadyFedRAMP Certified HostingSOC II Type II certifiedFedRAMP certified for hosting
- Hosting
- United States
- Customers named
- Tommy BahamaCotivitiNorthwell HealthBETMGMRentokilBluSkyTrimbleNorthwell
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial, integrations
What Qooper's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: qooper.io, qooper.io/pricing, qooper.io/platform-privacy-policy, qooper.io/case-studies, qooper.io/integrations. 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 Qooper'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 Qooper, 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 Qooper by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Qooper 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 Qooper, 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.