Small business▼−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 20 → 40 of 125
3 categories · Named, not rankedTeammeter
11Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
8 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
6 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Teammeter was named 6 times in Internal talent marketpl and 2 other categories, where Fuel50 led with 47%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business31 of 129
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market17 of 102
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In internal talent marketpl · 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 Teammeter 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal talent marketplace | Performance and talent management | 0% | 17 of 102 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Fuel50 at 47% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Skills intelligence | Performance and talent management | 0% | 63 of 127 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Skills Base at 18% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Succession planning | Performance and talent management | 0% | 81 of 93 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Lattice at 28% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Teammeter held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Internal talent marketpl · 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 24 → 15 of 93
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal talent marketpl | 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 24 → 17 of 102 |
| Skills intelligence | 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 67 → 63 of 127 |
| Succession planning | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 81 of 93, 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 Teammeter 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 Teammeter 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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
Direct2 labelsNone
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained6 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative11 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.
“Teammeter is a highly rated, GDPR-compliant German platform that quickly maps skills” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Skills intelligence · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“Free plan available, with 30-day trial for paid tiers” Kimi K2 · Internal talent marketpl · budget prompt · alternative
“Strong runner-up: Teammeter” Grok 4.1 Fast · Internal talent marketpl · budget prompt · alternative
“Best Free Option” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Internal talent marketpl · budget 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 Teammeter, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Teammeter was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Teammeter, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Teammeter 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 Teammeter. 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 11 of the 11 answers that named Teammeter and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
itechguides.com8
peoplemanagingpeople.com7
firsthr.app6
sourceforge.net6
teammeter.comYour site6
talentguard.com5
engagedly.com4
gartner.com4
omr.com4
pin.com4
Forty-eight of the fifty-four domain citations in answers naming Teammeter came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on teammeter.com
583
subdomains included
Content
104
counted in the table below
Documentation
18
Product · Integration
5 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 88 | 7 | 2026-09-16 | Workforce planning, Succession planning | |
| Glossary or explainer | 6 | 0 | 2026-06-18 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 4 | 0 | 2023-11-01 | ||
| Report or ebook | 2 | 0 | 2025-12-09 | Succession planning | |
| Case study | 1 | 0 | 2026-01-21 | ||
| Comparison | 1 | 1 | 2026-09-02 | ||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated | |||
| News or press | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-16Deloitte human capital trends 2026 blog
- 2026-09-16Competency model definition personal development blog
- 2026-09-02Upskilling vs reskilling definition differences benefits comparison
- 2026-09-02Upskilling and reskilling playbook blog
- 2026-08-21How to create a skill catalog blog
- 2026-08-20Skill matrix fuer eure rollen blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page teammeter.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 Teammeter
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Teammeter; a claim can dispute any of them.
TeamMeter / HRsoft 1
Follow Teammeter
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
Teammeter is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Teammeter is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- A skills and team performance platform helping managers understand teams, track availability, and make better decisions.
- For
- managers
- Price stated
- Start for free. Upgrade anytime. teammeter.com
- Free plan or trial
- 30-day free trial teammeter.com
- Integrations claimed
- 25 teammeter.com · 12 teammeter.com/pricing pages disagree
- Certifications
- ISO 27001 Certified100% GDPR CompliantGDPR-compliantSingle Sign-On (SSO)HRIS integrations
- Hosting
- Germany
- Customers named
- DB Systel GmbHCreditform Mainz Langenfeld KGCloudogu GmbHCLADEOstertag DeTeWeUpsters EnergyGrouplinkBraintower
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price
What Teammeter's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: teammeter.com, teammeter.com/pricing, teammeter.com/solution/project-staffing, teammeter.com/partners. 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 Teammeter'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 Teammeter, 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 Teammeter by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Teammeter 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 Teammeter, 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.