HR AI Index
Index Vendors › Ficstar · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Named, not ranked

Ficstar

4Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
2 of 12Models named it
1Category
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.1, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Ficstar was named 2 times in Compensation benchmarkin, where Payscale led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In compensation benchmarkin · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Ficstar 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Compensation benchmarking dataCompensation and total rewards0%38 of 1440%2under 10 labels · led by Payscale at 24%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Ficstar 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 Ficstar across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast00000
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash00000
Llama 4 Maverick01001
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX01001
MiniMax M2.500000

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
Direct2 labelsNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.

“For niche or competitor-specific data, Ficstar can be a valuable supplement.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Compensation benchmarkin · direct prompt · alternative
“worth considering custom data collection providers like Ficstar” Llama 4 Maverick · Compensation benchmarkin · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Ficstar, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Ficstar was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Mercer3 of 42Not in the top three
Pave2 of 42Not in the top three
Willis Towers Watson2 of 41Not in the top three
Korn Ferry2 of 40Not in the top three
Ravio2 of 40Not in the top three
Salary.com CompAnalyst2 of 40Not in the top three
BLS OEWS1 of 41Not in the top three
Comprehensive.io1 of 41Not in the top three
15Five1 of 40Not in the top three
Aon1 of 40Not 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 Ficstar. 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 4 of the 4 answers that named Ficstar and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ficstar.comYour site4
ravio.com4
compensation-iq.com2
imercer.com2
wtwco.com2
bestrecruitingtools.com1
captivateiq.com1
complogix.io1
comprehensive.io1
comptool.com1

Fifteen of the nineteen domain citations in answers naming Ficstar came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

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 Ficstar'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 Ficstar, 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 ficstar.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.