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 40 → 45 of 69
Sift
16Judge labels
0First choices
4Negative labels
8 / 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.
Standing
5 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Sift was named 5 times in Org charts, where ChartHop led with 30%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business27 of 72
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market25 of 95
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise61 of 86
0%6 labels
under the label threshold
In org charts · 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 Sift 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Org charts and org design | Workforce planning and analytics | 0% | 25 of 95 | 20% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 30% | =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, Sift held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Org charts · 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 16 → 24 of 90
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 19 → 56 of 80
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Org charts | 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 16 → 25 of 95 |
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 Sift 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 Sift 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 | 1 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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
Direct3 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative4 labelsNone
Budget-constrained2 labelsNone
Scale-constrained4 labelsNone
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative16 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.
“The Directory & Engagement-First Platforms (Best for: Distributed/Remote teams and Employee UX) * *Examples:* Sift, Pingboard” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · scale prompt · alternative
“dedicated, modern organizational chart tool (e.g., ChartHop, Pingboard, Orgimi, Sift, or TeamOrgChart)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · negative prompt · alternative
“Best for Internal Directory & Employee Search: Sift ... Sift is an exceptional choice” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · direct prompt · alternative
“Best for Updated Charts” MiniMax M2.5 · Org charts · direct 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.
“Sift has slow loading, occasional bugs, and thin reporting and analytics features” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Sift, over the 16 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sift was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Sift, over the 16 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sift 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 Sift. 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 16 answers that named Sift and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
teamohana.com10
onedirectory.com9
peoplemanagingpeople.com7
theorgchart.com7
connecteam.com6
firsthr.app6
g2.com6
organimi.com6
anywherer.com5
forbes.com5
No domain is on file for Sift, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Sift stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Sift stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 27,100 a month (“sift”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 5,273 a month
- Its own site
- No site of its own on file, so no site figures
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 25 of 95 in org charts
Segment leader
30%
ChartHop
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 16 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 Sift
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 Sift'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 Sift, 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 Sift by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Sift 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 Sift, 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.