Every category where a model named BackgroundChecks.com 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
Background screening	Talent acquisition	12%	4 of 59	8%	13	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for BackgroundChecks.com yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated BackgroundChecks.com across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	0	0	2
Mistral Small	1	0	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	2	0	1	0	3
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	2	0	0	2

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

Direct8 labels3

Paraphrase9 labelsNone

Comparative8 labelsNone

Budget-constrained16 labels8

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative46 labels in all, every segment counted; 11 of the 11 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.

“I'd pick BackgroundChecks.com for most small companies because it is explicitly positioned as the budget option with no commitment” Perplexity Sonar · Background screening · budget prompt · first choice

“1. BackgroundChecks.com - an FCRA-compliant background screening provider for small and mid-sized businesses.” Llama 4 Maverick · Background screening · direct prompt · first choice

“Offers the most budget-friendly pay-as-you-go option, with basic checks starting at $24.99 per report” Mistral Small · Background screening · budget prompt · first choice

“The best background check provider for a company with a limited budget is BackgroundChecks.com” Llama 4 Maverick · Background screening · budget prompt · first choice

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.

“Why avoid: These are not FCRA-compliant consumer reporting agencies.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Background screening · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as BackgroundChecks.com, over the 46 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and BackgroundChecks.com was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Checkr39 of 4615Not in the top three

GoodHire37 of 4613Not in the top three

Certn25 of 465Not in the top three

HireRight13 of 462Not in the top three

GCheck11 of 461Not in the top three

Accurate Background8 of 460Not in the top three

Sterling8 of 460Not in the top three

First Advantage7 of 460Not in the top three

HireShield6 of 461Not in the top three

ShareAble for Hires6 of 460Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 BackgroundChecks.com. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 44 of the 46 answers that named BackgroundChecks.com and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

checkr.com39

bib.com30

fitsmallbusiness.com30

gcheck.com30

firsthr.app24

checkrreviews.com20

goodhire.com15

learn.g2.com15

logicalrefer.com11

costbench.com10

224 of the 224 domain citations in answers naming BackgroundChecks.com came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

checkr.com/resources/articles/best-background-checks39

gcheck.com/blog/9-best-background-check-companies-for-small-businesses30

fitsmallbusiness.com/best-background-check-companies29

bib.com/blog/best-background-screening-companies-comparison28

firsthr.app/compare/general/employee-background-check-services24

checkrreviews.com/best-background-check-services20

learn.g2.com/best-background-check-software15

goodhire.com/background-checks/small-business13

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as BackgroundChecks.com

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as BackgroundChecks.com; a claim can dispute any of them.

backgroundchecks.com 2Background Checks.com 1

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 BackgroundChecks.com'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 BackgroundChecks.com, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at backgroundchecks.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.