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 62 → 47 of 54
SAP · 1 category · RankedSAP SuccessFactors Time Management
23Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
13 / 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.
Best standing
0% in Time and attendance for enterprise buyers
Rank 33 of 86 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 2 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business49 of 57
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Mid-market33 of 86
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise22 of 87
0%19 labels
accepted challenger
In time and attendance · 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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time and attendance | Core HR and payroll | 0% | 33 of 86 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Clockify at 12% | =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, SAP SuccessFactors Time Management held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Time and attendance · by segment
Mid-market=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 31 → 44 of 77
Enterprise▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 10 → 20 of 76
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time and attendance | 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 31 → 33 of 86 |
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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management 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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | 0 | 1 | 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
Direct2 labelsNone
Paraphrase5 labelsNone
Comparative11 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative2 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative23 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.
“Strong for organizations already in the SAP ecosystem” GPT-5.4 mini · Time and attendance · comparative 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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management, over the 23 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP SuccessFactors Time Management was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP SuccessFactors Time Management, over the 23 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP SuccessFactors Time Management 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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management. 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 23 of the 23 answers that named SAP SuccessFactors Time Management and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
guideflow.com13
learn.g2.com12
g2.com9
paylocity.com8
gitnux.org7
jibble.io7
peoplemanagingpeople.com7
wifitalents.com7
worldmetrics.org7
gartner.com6
Eighty-three of the eighty-three domain citations in answers naming SAP SuccessFactors Time Management came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where SAP SuccessFactors Time Management stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where SAP SuccessFactors Time Management stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 10 a month (“sap successfactors time management”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 0 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on SAP's site (sap.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 33 of 86 in time and attendance
Segment leader
12%
Clockify
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 23 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 23 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.
Names read as SAP SuccessFactors Time Management
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SAP SuccessFactors Time Management; a claim can dispute any of them.
SAP SuccessFactors 1SAP SuccessFactors Time Tracking 1
Follow SAP SuccessFactors Time Management
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
SAP is the company behind SAP SuccessFactors Time Management.ShowHide
The company
SAP is the company behind SAP SuccessFactors Time Management.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from SAP
- SAP Analytics Cloud, SAP Ariba, SAP BPC / SAP Analytics Cloud, SAP ECC, SAP Engagement Cloud, SAP Fieldglass, SAP GRC, SAP Joule and 24 more
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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management'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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management, 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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where SAP SuccessFactors Time Management 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 SAP SuccessFactors Time Management, 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.