Every category where a model named Buddy Punch 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
Time and attendance	Core HR and payroll	2%	12 of 90	14%	14	accepted challenger
Leave and absence management	Core HR and payroll	0%	29 of 89	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by BambooHR at 28%
Workforce scheduling	Core HR and payroll	0%	29 of 94	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Deputy at 26%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Buddy Punch 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 Buddy Punch 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	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	0	0	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	2	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	1	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	2	0	0	2
Kimi K2	0	1	2	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	1	1	4
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct9 labelsNone

Paraphrase8 labels2

Comparative20 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained8 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative3 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative51 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 4 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.

“strong third-party reviews (like TSheets/QuickBooks Time, Deputy, or Buddy Punch)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Time and attendance · negative prompt · first choice

“would be UKG Ready, Paylocity, or Buddy Punch” Llama 4 Maverick · Time and attendance · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Buddy Punch if you want PTO plus time clock/payroll-oriented features at a relatively low starting price.” Perplexity Sonar · Leave · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Pick Buddy Punch if you need a simple, shared-device kiosk experience for up to 8 employees.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Time and attendance · budget 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.

“Be cautious of vendors with poor support, no integration, or hidden fees (Kronos, TimeForce, Buddy Punch, etc.)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Time and attendance · negative prompt · hard negative

“Higher cost than some competitors” Mistral Small · Time and attendance · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Buddy Punch, over the 51 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Buddy Punch was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Connecteam34 of 516Not in the top three

Homebase28 of 514Not in the top three

Deputy18 of 512Not in the top three

When I Work18 of 510Not in the top three

Clockify17 of 516Not in the top three

QuickBooks Time17 of 511Not in the top three

BambooHR16 of 511Not in the top three

Jibble15 of 513Not in the top three

UKG Pro11 of 515Not in the top three

Day Off10 of 513Not 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 Buddy Punch. 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 48 of the 51 answers that named Buddy Punch and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

peoplemanagingpeople.com33

forbes.com30

selectsoftwarereviews.com21

business.com16

connecteam.com16

joinhomebase.com16

timetrex.com16

gartner.com15

techrepublic.com14

capterra.com13

190 of the 190 domain citations in answers naming Buddy Punch came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/time-and-attendance-software16

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-time-and-attendance-software15

forbes.com/advisor/business/software/best-time-attendance-software14

gartner.com/reviews/market/time-and-attendance-software14

timetrex.com/blog/best-time-and-attendance-software-202414

techrepublic.com/article/best-time-and-attendance-software13

business.com/categories/time-and-attendance-software12

employsome.com/best/leave-management-software9

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Buddy Punch'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 Buddy Punch, 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 buddypunch.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.