Every category where a model named Kudos 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
Recognition and rewards	Onboarding and employee experience	0%	13 of 55	14%	22	accepted challenger

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1	0	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	2	1	4
Mistral Small	0	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	3	1	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	1	0	3
Kimi K2	2	0	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	2	0	3
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct8 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labels1

Comparative23 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained7 labelsNone

Scale-constrained8 labelsNone

Negative12 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative61 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 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.

“Mid-Market Comprehensive | Scalability with robust features | Awardco, Motivosity, Kudos” Kimi K2 · Recognition and rewards · scale prompt · alternative

“For Tech-Savvy/Remote Teams: Look for strong Slack/Teams integrations (Kudos, Assembly)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Recognition and rewards · comparative prompt · alternative

“Choose Kudos if: Building a values-driven culture is your primary goal” Kimi K2 · Recognition and rewards · comparative prompt · alternative

“9. Kudos - Best for values-based, culture-focused recognition.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Recognition and rewards · 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.

“Pricing is not transparent; professional services and integration fees can be high ($10K–$50K+)” Mistral Small · Recognition and rewards · negative prompt · soft negative

“exercise caution with Awardco / Achievers / Workhuman / Kudos” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Recognition and rewards · negative prompt · soft negative

“outdated apps in some like Kudos (low app store ratings ~3.2/5)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Recognition and rewards · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Kudos, over the 61 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Kudos was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Bonusly52 of 6115Not in the top three

Nectar41 of 614Not in the top three

Motivosity37 of 612Not in the top three

Awardco36 of 613Not in the top three

Workhuman30 of 617Not in the top three

Achievers26 of 612Not in the top three

Guusto24 of 611Not in the top three

O.C. Tanner Culture Cloud13 of 612Not in the top three

Assembly12 of 610Not in the top three

Vantage Circle12 of 610Not 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 Kudos. 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 51 of the 61 answers that named Kudos and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

workhuman.com36

selectsoftwarereviews.com34

peoplemanagingpeople.com30

tremendous.com28

achievers.com25

g2.com23

gartner.com23

awardco.com21

crewhu.com20

bystadium.com17

257 of the 257 domain citations in answers naming Kudos came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/employee-recognition-software30

workhuman.com/blog/employee-recognition-software29

tremendous.com/blog/best-employee-recognition-platforms28

gartner.com/reviews/market/employee-recognition-and-reward-systems23

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-employee-recognition-platform21

crewhu.com/blog/employee-recognition-software20

achievers.com/blog/employee-recognition-platforms16

awardco.com/blog/best-employee-recognition-software16

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 Kudos'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 Kudos, 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 kudos.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.