Recruitment marketing and career sites · September 2026 Edition
Workable vs Phenom
Three of twelve models named Workable first on the direct prompt; two named Phenom. Workable was named by eleven of the twelve models and Phenom by twelve and Workable carries 24 labels and Phenom 35, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in nine categories this edition.
Named in seven categories this edition.
First-choice share16%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate17%20%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#5A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels2435A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Workable reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Jobvite was named alongside these two in seven of the twelve direct answers. Teamtailor vs Workable · Teamtailor vs Phenom · Workable vs Jobvite
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 recruitment marketing and career sites page.
By framing
How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
WorkableFirst choices, of twelve modelsPhenom
Direct321 against Phenom
Paraphrase501 against Phenom
Comparative04
Budget-constrained001 against Workable · 1 against Phenom
Scale-constrained001 against Phenom
Negative003 against Workable · 3 against Phenom
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 Workable and Phenom 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 | | | |
Workable Phenom first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Workable on the left and Phenom on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Workable and Phenom stood in it.
Workable first, Phenom an alternative
3 of 12 modelsPhenom was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Kimi K2Jobvite, Workable alternatives: Beamery, Phenom
GLM 4.7 FlashXTalentLyft, Workable alternatives: Recruitee
MiniMax M2.5Jobvite, Workable alternatives: Gem, Phenom, Teamtailor
Phenom first, Workable not the choice
2 of 12 modelsWorkable was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-5.4 miniPhenom alternatives: Beamery, Joveo, Radancy
Perplexity SonarPhenom alternatives: SmartDreamers, Teamtailor
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.Mistral SmallJobvite alternatives: Joveo, Phenom, iCIMS
DeepSeek V4 FlashJobvite alternatives: Beamery, Phenom, Teamtailor, Workable
Neither was named
5 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5SmartDreamers alternatives: Greenhouse, Jobilla, LinkedIn Talent Solutions, Loxo
Gemini 3.5 FlashGem alternatives: Lever, Teamtailor
Grok 4.1 FastTeamtailor alternatives: Jobvite, Recruitee, TalentLyft
Llama 4 MaverickJobvite
Qwen 3.7 FlashJobvite alternatives: SmartDreamers, iCIMS
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
Level: the same share of first choices.
Workable0%#9 of 16Phenom0%#16 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
The order flips: Phenom leads at enterprise.
Phenom41%#1 of 13Workable2%#– of 13What the models said about Workable
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.
“Avoid for tight budgets: Workable ($299+/month)” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · hard negative
“Be Cautious With ... Users report billing disputes, inflexible features, slow support, and integration failures” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“I'd recommend Workable as the default choice because it delivers a polished, branded careers page right out of the box” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Workable is a battle-tested ATS with a careers page that is best for mid-market companies (50–500 employees)” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Phenom
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.
“Why avoid? Phenom is also noted for being expensive, which may not justify the cost for smaller organizations” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“the strongest overall choice is usually Phenom if you want the most complete recruitment marketing and candidate experience platform” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose Phenom if you want to elevate your global employer brand with modern, highly personalized candidate-facing career sites.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best For: Large enterprises seeking a "full-lifecycle" solution.... holistic Talent Experience Management platform” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared
Teamtailor vs WorkableTeamtailor vs PhenomWorkable vs JobviteWorkable vs 100HiresWorkable vs GreenhouseWorkable vs TalentLyftWorkable vs LinkedIn Talent SolutionsJobvite vs Phenom100Hires vs PhenomPhenom vs GreenhousePhenom vs TalentLyftPhenom vs LinkedIn Talent SolutionsAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full recruitment marketing 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.