Every category where a model named ChartHop 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
Workforce planning	Workforce planning and analytics	31%	1 of 89	3%	37	endorsed leader
Org charts and org design	Workforce planning and analytics	27%	1 of 81	16%	38	accepted challenger
People analytics	Workforce planning and analytics	8%	5 of 99	10%	29	accepted challenger
Compensation management	Compensation and total rewards	1%	30 of 189	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Pave at 18%
Succession planning	Performance and talent management	0%	22 of 99	0%	10	accepted challenger
Pay equity	Compensation and total rewards	0%	21 of 60	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by Syndio at 17%
Talent intelligence	Performance and talent management	0%	46 of 77	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Pin at 17%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for ChartHop 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 ChartHop 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	1	1	1	1	4
GPT-5.4 mini	0	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	9	7	0	2	18
Perplexity Sonar	1	5	3	1	10
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	6	4	1	13
Mistral Small	1	2	3	1	7
DeepSeek V4 Flash	8	4	2	3	17
Llama 4 Maverick	4	2	3	0	9
Qwen 3.7 Flash	6	3	2	0	11
Kimi K2	3	6	2	2	13
GLM 4.7 FlashX	5	8	3	0	16
MiniMax M2.5	2	0	4	0	6

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

Direct59 labels10

Paraphrase54 labels22

Comparative88 labels7not counted in share

Budget-constrained49 labels14

Scale-constrained49 labels11

Negative42 labels7not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative341 labels in all, every segment counted; 57 of the 71 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.

“ChartHop is known for its ease of use and strong visualization capabilities, particularly for mid-market organizations seeking greater organizational visibility” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Workforce planning · direct prompt · first choice

“The Specialized Standalones (Best for 500) Examples: ChartHop, Xenspace, Datasnapshots ... Verdict: Often the sweet spot for companies at your size.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Org charts · scale prompt · first choice

“ChartHop: Highly visual, built around interactive org charts with excellent "what-if" scenario planning and strong mid-market integrations.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Workforce planning · scale prompt · first choice

“Choose ChartHop if you want a visual, collaborative, and HR-friendly tool... (This is the most common crowd-pleaser for mid-sized teams)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Workforce planning · paraphrase 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.

“avoid it if your main goal is engagement analytics, sentiment analysis, or performance management” Perplexity Sonar · People analytics · negative prompt · hard negative

“What to Avoid on a Tight Budget - ChartHop: ... requires a ~$9,000/year minimum commitment.” Kimi K2 · Org charts · budget prompt · hard negative

“minimum annual cost of around $9,000 and charges per employee, making it less suitable for smaller companies” Mistral Small · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative

“*Warning:* While the entry cost is low, ChartHop is highly modular... which can quickly drive up the price.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · People analytics · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as ChartHop, over the 341 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ChartHop was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Visier118 of 34127Not in the top three

BambooHR84 of 34119Not in the top three

Lucidchart78 of 3418Not in the top three

Rippling71 of 34111Compare →

Pingboard67 of 3414Not in the top three

SAP SuccessFactors63 of 3418Not in the top three

OrgChart58 of 3418Not in the top three

Organimi57 of 34116Compare →

Workday56 of 3414Not in the top three

Lattice54 of 34110Not 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 ChartHop. 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 271 of the 341 answers that named ChartHop and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

peoplemanagingpeople.com132

gartner.com111

learn.g2.com89

guideflow.com86

firsthr.app85

worldmetrics.org72

selectsoftwarereviews.com67

theorgchart.com67

g2.com63

charthop.comYour site49

772 of the 821 domain citations in answers naming ChartHop came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/org-chart-software56

forbes.com/advisor/business/software/best-org-chart-software41

theorgchart.com/resources/best-org-chart-software39

learn.g2.com/best-org-chart-software36

orgchartstudio.com/blog/org-chart-software-comparison35

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/workforce-planning-software34

onedirectory.com/blog/best-org-chart-software33

personio.com/hr-lexicon/hr-analytics-tools33

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as ChartHop

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

ChartHop (Basic) 1ChartHop (Compensation Module) 1ChartHop (Core Plan) 1ChartHop (Core/Basic) 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 ChartHop'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 ChartHop, 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 charthop.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.