Every category where a model named CareerBuilder 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
Job advertising and distribution	Talent acquisition	0%	104 of 109	58%	12	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for CareerBuilder 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 CareerBuilder across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	1
Mistral Small	1	1	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	1	1
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	2	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	1	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative21 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative26 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Stick to well-established, reputable job boards ... Glassdoor, and CareerBuilder.” Mistral Small · Job advertising · negative 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.

“Older, formerly dominant job boards (such as Monster or CareerBuilder) that still charge premium, flat-rate subscription fees” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Job advertising · negative prompt · soft negative

“Technical glitches, spam, low responses, bankruptcy in 2025 reduced viability; poor employer reviews.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Job advertising · negative prompt · soft negative

“Very poor ratings (~1.1/5 on ConsumerAffairs, 1/5 on BBB). Complaints about spam, irrelevant offers” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Job advertising · negative prompt · soft negative

“less of a standalone channel after its 2025 restructuring” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Job advertising · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

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

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Indeed24 of 265Not in the top three

Monster22 of 260Not in the top three

ZipRecruiter19 of 261Not in the top three

LinkedIn17 of 264Not in the top three

Glassdoor13 of 260Not in the top three

Craigslist11 of 260Not in the top three

Google for Jobs10 of 262Not in the top three

Dice8 of 260Not in the top three

Intch7 of 260Not in the top three

LinkedIn Jobs5 of 261Not 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 CareerBuilder. 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 22 of the 26 answers that named CareerBuilder and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

reddit.com16

linkedin.com13

g2.com9

totaldefense.com8

consumer.ftc.gov7

consumeraffairs.com6

hrmorning.com6

joveo.com6

noon.ai6

pin.com6

Eighty-three of the eighty-three domain citations in answers naming CareerBuilder came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

totaldefense.com/security-blog/job-board-safety-guide-how-to-avoid-employment-scams-on-fak8

linkedin.com/posts/fiona-de-villiers_ethical-give-activistsrevealcorruption-activity-742947

hrmorning.com/articles/bad-job-boards6

noon.ai/blog/articles/143-best-job-posting-sites6

consumer.ftc.gov/articles/job-scams5

firsthr.app/compare/hiring/job-boards5

pin.com/blog/best-job-posting-sites5

reddit.com/r/recruitinghell/comments/17a2j56/are_there_any_job_boards_that_arent_mostly_sc5

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 CareerBuilder'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 CareerBuilder, 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 careerbuilder.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.