People analytics · September 2026 Edition
Crunchr vs ChartHop
Six of twelve models named Crunchr first on the direct prompt; two named ChartHop. Crunchr was named by eleven of the twelve models and ChartHop by nine and both carry 29 labels, so the shares below are directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in seven categories this edition.
First-choice share13%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate3%10%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#5A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels2929Equal, which is what makes the shares comparable.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Crunchr reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.HiBob vs Crunchr · HiBob vs ChartHop · Crunchr vs BambooHR
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the people analytics page.
By framing
How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
CrunchrFirst choices, of twelve modelsChartHop
Direct62
Paraphrase11
Comparative00
Budget-constrained002 against ChartHop
Scale-constrained01
Negative111 against Crunchr · 1 against ChartHop
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.
Every model, every framing
The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Crunchr and ChartHop stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | |||
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | |||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | |||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | |
Crunchr ChartHop first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Crunchr on the left and ChartHop on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Crunchr and ChartHop stood in it.
Both were the first choice
1 of 12 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.DeepSeek V4 FlashChartHop, Crunchr alternatives: Culture Amp, Lattice, Leapsome, Orgnostic
Crunchr first, ChartHop an alternative
5 of 12 modelsChartHop was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Perplexity SonarCrunchr, HiBob alternatives: ChartHop, Culture Amp
Grok 4.1 FastCrunchr alternatives: ChartHop, Lattice
Mistral SmallCrunchr alternatives: HiBob, Lattice
Kimi K2Crunchr alternatives: ChartHop, Visier
GLM 4.7 FlashXCrunchr alternatives: BambooHR, ChartHop, Personio
ChartHop first, Crunchr not the choice
1 of 12 modelsCrunchr was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Llama 4 MaverickChartHop
Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniVisier alternatives: ChartHop, Crunchr, Workday Peakon
Gemini 3.5 FlashKnoetic alternatives: ChartHop, Culture Amp, Illoominus, Paradox
Neither was named
3 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5HiBob alternatives: Rippling, UKG People Analytics
Qwen 3.7 FlashVisier alternatives: Culture Amp, HiBob, Looker, Tableau
MiniMax M2.5Visier alternatives: Lattice, Workday HCM
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
ChartHop leads by two points.
ChartHop2%#10 of 16Crunchr0%#14 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Crunchr leads at mid-market.
Crunchr13%#2 of 12ChartHop8%#5 of 12Enterprise
The order flips: ChartHop leads at enterprise.
ChartHop9%#3 of 9Crunchr0%#5 of 9What the models said about Crunchr
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“avoid it if you are outside Europe and do not need CSRD-style compliance reporting” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · hard negative
“I'd lean toward Rippling if you need an integrated HR platform, or Crunchr if you already have an HRIS” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Crunchr is the top choice due to its focus on mid-market needs, quick setup, and GDPR compliance.” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
“the best *default* choice is usually Crunchr if you want a dedicated people analytics platform” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about ChartHop
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“avoid it if your main goal is engagement analytics, sentiment analysis, or performance management” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · hard negative
“*Warning:* While the entry cost is low, ChartHop is highly modular... which can quickly drive up the price.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
Also compared
HiBob vs CrunchrHiBob vs ChartHopCrunchr vs BambooHRCrunchr vs VisierCrunchr vs LatticeCrunchr vs RipplingCrunchr vs Culture AmpBambooHR vs ChartHopVisier vs ChartHopChartHop vs LatticeChartHop vs RipplingChartHop vs Culture AmpAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full people analytics standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.