HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › LinkedIn Jobs · September 2026 Edition

LinkedIn · 1 category · Named, not ranked

LinkedIn Jobs

16Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

8 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

6 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. LinkedIn Jobs was named 6 times in Job advertising, where JobTarget led with 21%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business22 of 94

under the label threshold

Mid-market18 of 109

under the label threshold

Enterprise39 of 70

under the label threshold

In job advertising · 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 LinkedIn Jobs 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
Job advertising and distribution	Talent acquisition	0%	18 of 109	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by JobTarget at 21%

Movement

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

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

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

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative11 labels4not counted in share

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative16 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 4 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.

“If you are hiring for office-based, management, or highly technical roles, prioritize LinkedIn.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Job advertising · comparative prompt · first choice

“Use LinkedIn for professional/salaried roles.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Job advertising · comparative prompt · first choice

“LinkedIn excels at reaching professionals and passive job seekers” Mistral Small · Job advertising · comparative prompt · alternative

“LinkedIn: best for professional targeting and passive talent.” GPT-5.4 mini · Job advertising · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LinkedIn Jobs, over the 16 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LinkedIn Jobs was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Indeed14 of 164Not in the top three

ZipRecruiter13 of 161Not in the top three

Google for Jobs6 of 161Not in the top three

Joveo5 of 164Not in the top three

Appcast5 of 163Not in the top three

CareerBuilder5 of 160Not in the top three

Glassdoor5 of 160Not in the top three

Handshake5 of 160Not in the top three

Wellfound5 of 160Not in the top three

Craigslist4 of 160Not 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 LinkedIn Jobs. 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 12 of the 16 answers that named LinkedIn Jobs and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com7

ziprecruiter.com6

100hires.com4

business.linkedin.comYour site4

cxeverywhere.com4

guideflow.com4

pitchmeai.com4

adway.ai3

builtin.com3

fitsmallbusiness.com3

Thirty-eight of the forty-two domain citations in answers naming LinkedIn Jobs came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cxeverywhere.com/tools/job-posting-software4

g2.com/discussions/which-programmatic-job-advertising-platforms-are-the-highest-rated-for-4

guideflow.com/blog/programmatic-job-advertising-software4

fitsmallbusiness.com/best-job-posting-sites3

g2.com/compare/appcast-vs-joveo3

g2.com/discussions/what-are-the-highest-rated-programmatic-job-advertising-platforms-for-c3

noon.ai/blog/articles/143-best-job-posting-sites3

talentlyft.com/blog/55-best-job-boards-in-2024-free-paid3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as LinkedIn Jobs

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

LinkedIn job distribution tools 1LinkedIn's native job ads 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 LinkedIn Jobs'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 LinkedIn Jobs, 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 linkedin.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.