Every category where a model named EQS Integrity Line 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
Whistleblowing and investigations	Core HR and payroll	0%	22 of 107	0%	9	under 10 labels · led by FaceUp at 25%

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	1	1	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	1	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 labels1

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative13 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labelsNone

Scale-constrained6 labels1

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative39 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 3 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 premium European alternative. Best For: Mid-to-enterprise level companies with strict GDPR and European data privacy requirements.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Whistleblowing · comparative prompt · alternative

“If your B2B company operates in multiple countries (EU, US, APAC) or is highly regulated, EQS is a strong alternative.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Whistleblowing · direct prompt · alternative

“top-rated in G2/Capterra ... Enterprise-grade for businesses; tracks cases with analytics; not for public leaks.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Whistleblowing · comparative prompt · alternative

“EQS Integrity Line if budget transparency and affordable entry pricing are priorities” Kimi K2 · Whistleblowing · direct 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as EQS Integrity Line, over the 39 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and EQS Integrity Line was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

NAVEX One29 of 3914Not among the top eight

SpeakUp19 of 393Not among the top eight

Whistlelink18 of 391Not among the top eight

Whispli14 of 392Not among the top eight

Case IQ13 of 393Not among the top eight

FaceUp13 of 392Not among the top eight

Whistleblower Software9 of 391Not among the top eight

EthicsPoint8 of 393Not among the top eight

AllVoices7 of 390Not among the top eight

NAVEX EthicsPoint6 of 393Not 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 EQS Integrity Line. 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 39 of the 39 answers that named EQS Integrity Line and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

navex.com28

guideflow.com26

faceup.com25

whistlelink.com25

ordio.com24

g2.com19

speakup.com18

gartner.com16

firsthr.app14

diligent.com12

No domain is on file for EQS Integrity Line, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/whistleblowing-software24

ordio.com/en/insights/guides/whistleblowing-software24

whistlelink.com/en-us/blog/best-whistleblowing-software-2026-top-rated-digital-solutions18

navex.com/en-us/platform/whistleblowing-software-solutions17

gartner.com/reviews/market/whistleblowing-software16

firsthr.app/compare/general/whistleblower-platform14

g2.com/categories/whistleblowing14

elker.com/articles/whistleblowing-software12

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where EQS Integrity Line stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 50 a month (“eqs integrity line”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 0 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 22 of 107 in whistleblowing

Segment leader

25%

FaceUp

First choices: 2 across its categories
Named in: 39 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 EQS Integrity Line

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

EQS Integrity Line (formerly Convercent) 1NAVEX / EQS Integrity Line 1

Follow EQS Integrity Line

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 EQS Integrity Line'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 EQS Integrity Line, 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 EQS Integrity Line by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where EQS Integrity Line 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 EQS Integrity Line, 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.