Every category where a model named Bright Funds 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
Employee giving and volunteering	Onboarding and employee experience	8%	4 of 70	6%	16	accepted challenger

Movement

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

By model

How each model treated Bright Funds 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	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	4	0	1	5
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	1	0	1	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	0	0	2
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	1	0	0	0	1

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

Direct10 labels5

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained5 labels1

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative26 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 6 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.

“Bright Funds stands out as the top choice due to its focus on impact, ease of use, and alignment with corporate social responsibility goals” Mistral Small · Giving & volunteering · direct prompt · first choice

“The best employee giving and volunteering platform for a mid-market B2B company is Bright Funds” Llama 4 Maverick · Giving & volunteering · direct prompt · first choice

“I'd suggest starting with Bright Funds or Uncommon Giving” MiniMax M2.5 · Giving & volunteering · direct prompt · first choice

“Top Recommendation for Mid‑Market B2B Companies: Bright Funds” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Giving & volunteering · direct 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.

“Nonprofit Confusion & Onboarding Friction... Basic and Slow UI” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Giving & volunteering · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Bright Funds, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Bright Funds was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Benevity Enterprise Impact Platform20 of 266Compare →

Uncommon Giving16 of 263Compare →

Groundswell12 of 264Compare →

Millie11 of 263Compare →

YourCause10 of 260Compare →

Selflessly8 of 265Compare →

Deed7 of 261Compare →

Goodera7 of 261Not among the top eight

Percent Pledge4 of 260Not among the top eight

YourCause from Blackbaud3 of 262Not among the top eight

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 Bright Funds. 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 25 of the 26 answers that named Bright Funds and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

uncommongiving.com17

stratuslive.com16

bonterratech.com15

guideflow.com15

yourcause.com12

g2.com11

goodera.com11

benevity.com10

worldmetrics.org9

blog.betterimpact.com6

No domain is on file for Bright Funds, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

stratuslive.com/blog/7-best-workplace-giving-platforms16

guideflow.com/blog/corporate-volunteering-software12

uncommongiving.com/uncommon-blog/csr-software11

guideflow.com/blog/corporate-giving-software10

bonterratech.com/blog/corporate-giving-platforms8

bonterratech.com/blog/charitable-giving-software7

guideflow.com/blog/csr-software7

uncommongiving.com/uncommon-blog/corporate-volunteering-platform7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Bright Funds stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 880 a month (“bright funds”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 101 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 4 of 70 in giving & volunteering

Segment leader

22%

Millie

First choices: 6 across its categories
Named in: 26 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.

Names read as Bright Funds

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

Bright Funds (by Submittable) 1

Follow Bright Funds

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.

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 Bright Funds'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 Bright Funds, 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 Bright Funds by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Bright Funds 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 Bright Funds, 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.