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

LifterLMS

19Judge labels
13First choices
2Negative labels
9 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. LifterLMS was named 3 times in Learning management syst, where TalentLMS led with 48%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
In learning management syst · 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 LifterLMS 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
Learning management systemsLearning and development0%51 of 7433%3under 10 labels · led by TalentLMS at 48%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for LifterLMS 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 LifterLMS 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 Flash00101
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00011
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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained15 labels13
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative2 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative19 labels in all, every segment counted; 13 of the 13 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.

“LifterLMS: Offers a flat annual license and is suitable for internal teams, associations, and customer onboarding.” Llama 4 Maverick · Learning management syst · scale 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.

“Researchers have identified serious security flaws in these three popular WordPress LMS plugins” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Learning management syst · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LifterLMS, over the 19 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LifterLMS was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Docebo13 of 190Not in the top three
Cornerstone OnDemand12 of 190Not in the top three
TalentLMS8 of 191Not in the top three
Absorb LMS6 of 190Not in the top three
360Learning5 of 190Not in the top three
Moodle4 of 190Not in the top three
Workademy3 of 191Not in the top three
Blackboard Learn3 of 190Not in the top three
SAP SuccessFactors Learning3 of 190Not in the top three
Valamis3 of 190Not 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 LifterLMS. 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 18 of the 19 answers that named LifterLMS and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

lifterlms.comYour site17
docebo.com8
elearningindustry.com8
talentlms.com8
konstantly.com7
lmspedia.org7
valamis.com7
companylms.com6
educate-me.co6
ispring.com6

Sixty-three of the eighty domain citations in answers naming LifterLMS 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 LifterLMS'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 LifterLMS, 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 lifterlms.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.

Subscribe to the pack