Every category where a model named ChatGPT 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
HR AI assistants	Onboarding and employee experience	10%	3 of 119	27%	11	criticized challenger
Frontline employee apps	Onboarding and employee experience	0%	91 of 97	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by Connecteam at 56%
AI recruiting assistants	Talent acquisition	0%	56 of 84	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by GoPerfect at 19%
Compensation management	Compensation and total rewards	0%	152 of 189	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Pave at 18%
Employee wellbeing and mental health	Onboarding and employee experience	0%	75 of 99	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Wellable at 30%
HR compliance and policy management	Core HR and payroll	0%	78 of 84	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Rippling at 16%
People analytics	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	59 of 99	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by HiBob at 15%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for ChatGPT 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 ChatGPT 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	1	0	1	1	3
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	1	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	0	1	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	1	0	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	4	6
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained21 labels6

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative18 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative46 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.

“the best AI assistant for an HR team is usually ChatGPT or Claude for drafting and internal support tasks” Perplexity Sonar · HR AI assistants · budget prompt · first choice

“A general-purpose writing assistant (ChatGPT or Claude) — The cheapest and most flexible option.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · HR AI assistants · budget prompt · first choice

“My top pick for most limited budgets: Start with ChatGPT (free) for content creation” Kimi K2 · HR AI assistants · budget prompt · first choice

“Why ChatGPT Free Tier Stands Out as the Top Budget Pick” Grok 4.1 Fast · HR AI assistants · 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.

“OpenAI, ChatGPT, or similar consumer tools used by HR without proper governance - Why to avoid: Lack of confidentiality, privacy, accuracy, and accountability safeguards” GLM 4.7 FlashX · HR AI assistants · negative prompt · hard negative

“Experts (SixFifty) warn against using for legal docs without human review.” Grok 4.1 Fast · HR compliance · negative prompt · hard negative

“do not rely solely on crowdsourced data or raw AI models (like ChatGPT)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Compensation management · negative prompt · hard negative

“These are not safe for mental health support.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Employee wellbeing · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

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

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Claude24 of 460Not in the top three

Gusto18 of 466Not in the top three

BambooHR14 of 464Not in the top three

Rippling12 of 461Not in the top three

Workday10 of 460Not in the top three

Leena AI9 of 461Compare →

Moveworks8 of 462Not in the top three

HireVue8 of 460Not in the top three

Workativ Assistant7 of 461Compare →

Gemini7 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 ChatGPT. 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 36 of the 46 answers that named ChatGPT and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

firsthr.app17

peoplebox.ai15

gusto.com11

peoplemanagingpeople.com10

rippling.com10

herothemes.com9

linkedin.com9

moveworks.com9

thenontechai.com9

humand.co8

107 of the 107 domain citations in answers naming ChatGPT came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

peoplebox.ai/blog/ai-tools-hr-teams15

firsthr.app/compare/core-hr/hr-ai-tools13

herothemes.com/blog/hr-chatbots9

rippling.com/blog/hr-ai-tools9

thenontechai.com/best-free-low-cost-ai-hr-tools-small-businesses-20269

gusto.com/resources/guides/best-ai-hr-tools8

humand.co/en/compare/best-ai-powered-hr-software-tools8

resources.rework.com/tools/ai-tools/best-ai-tools-for-hr-20268

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as ChatGPT

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

ChatGPT (Business/Enterprise) 1ChatGPT (Free Tier) 1ChatGPT (Plus) 1ChatGPT (free tier) 1ChatGPT Enterprise 1ChatGPT Plus 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 ChatGPT'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 ChatGPT, 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 chatgpt.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.