Every category where a model named G-P 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
Global payroll and employer of record	Core HR and payroll	2%	10 of 66	18%	11	accepted challenger
HR compliance and policy management	Core HR and payroll	0%	57 of 84	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Rippling at 16%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for G-P 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 G-P 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	1	1	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	1	2
Mistral Small	0	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	0	1
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

Direct15 labels6

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative16 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels2

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative9 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative48 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 of the 9 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 broad global coverage with compliance depth: Safeguard Global or Globalization Partners.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Global payroll · direct prompt · first choice

“Lower-risk: Providers with wholly owned local entities (e.g., Globalization Partners has 100+ owned entities)” Kimi K2 · Global payroll · negative prompt · alternative

“Safeguard Global and G-P focus on white-glove, strategic consulting” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Global payroll · comparative prompt · alternative

“G-P – Best for global payroll without local entities” MiniMax M2.5 · Global payroll · comparative 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.

“G-P (180+ countries, typically $700\u2013900/mo) targets risk-averse enterprises... often overkill” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Global payroll · direct prompt · soft negative

“G-P: ticket support slowness, premium pricing) but fewer red flags” Grok 4.1 Fast · Global payroll · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as G-P, over the 48 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and G-P was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Deel44 of 4813Not in the top three

Remote41 of 488Not in the top three

Papaya Global36 of 485Not in the top three

Rippling31 of 481Not in the top three

Oyster23 of 480Not in the top three

Velocity Global18 of 482Not in the top three

Multiplier16 of 480Not in the top three

RemoFirst11 of 482Not in the top three

Safeguard Global11 of 480Not in the top three

Atlas HXM8 of 480Not 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 G-P. 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 43 of the 48 answers that named G-P and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com27

teamed.global23

employsome.com21

deel.com20

topsourceworldwide.com19

globaleorservices.org16

remote.com16

whichpayroll.com16

hr.software15

eorhq.com13

186 of the 186 domain citations in answers naming G-P came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/employer-of-record-eor27

employsome.com/employer-of-record/best-eor17

teamed.global/compare/best-eor-providers-202614

remote.com/blog/payroll/best-global-payroll-providers13

topsourceworldwide.com/insights/best-employer-of-record-providers13

globaleorservices.org/solutions/eor-comparison11

deel.com/blog/top-employer-of-record-services9

remotepeople.com/providers/best-eor9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as G-P

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

G-P (Globalization Partners) 5Globalization Partners 3

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 G-P'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 G-P, 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 globalization-partners.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.