Mid-marketnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 48 of 90, unchanged
1 category · Named, not rankedTeamOrgChart
2Judge labels
1First choices
0Negative labels
1 / 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
1 label, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. TeamOrgChart was named 1 time 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 businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market51 of 95
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Enterprise15 of 86
2%1 label
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 TeamOrgChart 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% | 51 of 95 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 30% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, TeamOrgChart held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Org charts · by segment
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 13 pointsRank 15 → 13 of 80
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Org charts | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 51 of 95, 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 TeamOrgChart 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 TeamOrgChart 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 | 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 | 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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 label1
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.
“dedicated, modern organizational chart tool (e.g., ChartHop, Pingboard, Orgimi, Sift, or TeamOrgChart)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · negative 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 TeamOrgChart, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and TeamOrgChart was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as TeamOrgChart, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and TeamOrgChart 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 TeamOrgChart. 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 2 of the 2 answers that named TeamOrgChart and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
organimi.com2
34.194.153.1401
blog.jostle.me1
blog.teamimprover.com1
connecteam.com1
creately.com1
edrawmind.wondershare.com1
forbes.com1
g2.com1
getapp.co.uk1
Eleven of the eleven domain citations in answers naming TeamOrgChart came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
teamorgchart.com ranks 8 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, TeamOrgChart takes 0% of first choices and ChartHop takes 30%.ShowHide
Search and answers
teamorgchart.com ranks 8 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, TeamOrgChart takes 0% of first choices and ChartHop takes 30%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “org chart tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “org chart software”
8
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 51 of 95 in org charts
Segment leader
30%
ChartHop
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 2 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 2 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 teamorgchart.com
38
subdomains included
Content
1
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-11 to 2026-10 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glossary or explainer | 1 | undated |
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page teamorgchart.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. Read October 5, 2026.
Follow TeamOrgChart
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
TeamOrgChart is its own company.ShowHide
The company
TeamOrgChart is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Organization Charts for Microsoft 365
- For
- Microsoft 365 organizations
- Price stated
- Simple pricing, based on your organization's size. teamorgchart.com/website/pricing
- Starting price
- 25 teamorgchart.com/website/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Free for 30 days, no credit card required. teamorgchart.com
- Certifications
- GDPR compliant
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, hosting, customers
What TeamOrgChart's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: teamorgchart.com, teamorgchart.com/website/pricing, teamorgchart.com/website/case-studies. 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 TeamOrgChart'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 TeamOrgChart, 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 TeamOrgChart by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where TeamOrgChart 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 TeamOrgChart, 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.