| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compensation management | Compensation and total rewards | 9% | 2 of 140 | 7% | 29 | accepted challenger | ▲+6Since September 2026: 4% → 10%, +6 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Compensation benchmarking data | Compensation and total rewards | 7% | 5 of 148 | 4% | 26 | accepted challenger | ▲+8Since September 2026: 0% → 8%, +8 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Pay equity | Compensation and total rewards | 0% | 20 of 73 | 0% | 13 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compensation benchmarkin | 0% | 8% | ▲+8Since September 2026: 0% → 8%, +8 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 19 → 5 of 148 |
| Compensation management | 4% | 10% | ▲+6Since September 2026: 4% → 10%, +6 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 2 of 140 |
| Pay equity | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 12 → 20 of 73 |
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
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 8 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 9 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 9 |
| Mistral Small | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 7 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Real-time compensation platforms (e.g., Ravio, Pave) that pull data directly from HRIS systems with human validation — more current and accurate than surveys” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Compensation benchmarkin · negative prompt · first choice
“I would pick Aeqium for compensation review workflow flexibility, or Ravio if your highest priority is market benchmarking and salary banding” Perplexity Sonar · Compensation management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“SalaryCube and Ravio are frequently recommended due to their comprehensive data, ease of use, and fit for mid-market needs.” Mistral Small · Compensation benchmarkin · direct prompt · first choice
“Ravio and CompUp are particularly strong choices if you need advanced features for complex, multi-country compensation planning” Mistral Small · Compensation management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
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.
“better suited for companies with fewer than 1,000 employees. They may become less predictable or scalable for larger organizations.” Mistral Small · Compensation management · negative prompt · soft negative
“Fine for small teams (<1,000 users), but avoid for enterprises” Grok 4.1 Fast · Compensation management · negative prompt · soft negative
“Europe/tech-leaning—less ideal for general B2B” Grok 4.1 Fast · Compensation benchmarkin · direct prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 165 of the 165 answers that named Ravio and are not a share of its labels.
563 of the 698 domain citations in answers naming Ravio came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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.
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 179 | 23 | 2026-09-29 | Pay equity, Compensation management | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 13 | 1 | 2026-08-03 | HRIS and HCM platforms, Compensation management | |
| Comparison | 10 | 1 | 2026-08-14 | Compensation management, HRIS and HCM platforms | |
| Case study | 9 | 1 | 2026-09-07 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 6 | 0 | 2026-04-23 | Pay equity | |
| Report or ebook | 4 | undated |
Every page ravio.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.
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.
What Ravio's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: ravio.com, trust.ravio.com. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Ravio'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 Ravio, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Ravio by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
Ravio is among the products AI models recommend first in Compensation management 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.
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.