HR AI Index
Index Vendors › Figures.hr · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Named, not ranked

Figures.hr

7Judge labels
1First choices
0Negative labels
3 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
3 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Figures.hr was named 3 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 Figures.hr 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%39 of 1440%3under 10 labels · led by Payscale at 24%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Figures.hr 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 Figures.hr 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 Fast00202
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash00000
Llama 4 Maverick00000
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00000
MiniMax M2.501001

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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained3 labels1
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative7 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.

“Real-time benchmarking platforms (like Ravio, Pave, Figures HR) often provide more accurate, current data” MiniMax M2.5 · Compensation benchmarkin · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Figures.hr, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Figures.hr was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Ravio6 of 60Not in the top three
Pave5 of 63Not in the top three
Payscale3 of 61Not in the top three
Salary.com3 of 60Not in the top three
Comprehensive2 of 61Not in the top three
BambooHR2 of 60Not in the top three
Comprehensive.io2 of 60Not in the top three
Comptool2 of 60Not in the top three
Salary.com CompAnalyst2 of 60Not in the top three
SalaryCube2 of 60Not 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 Figures.hr. 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 5 of the 6 answers that named Figures.hr and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ravio.com5
salarycube.com4
worldmetrics.org4
comprehensive.io3
deel.com3
captivateiq.com2
g2.com2
guideflow.com2
hibob.com2
hrtechsaas.com2

Twenty-nine of the twenty-nine domain citations in answers naming Figures.hr came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Figures.hr

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Figures.hr; a claim can dispute any of them.
Figures HR 1figures.hr 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 Figures.hr'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 Figures.hr, 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 figures.hr 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.

Subscribe to the pack