Every category where a model named LinkedIn Learning 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
Online course libraries	Learning and development	28%	2 of 73	7%	46	accepted challenger
Learning experience platforms	Learning and development	0%	13 of 80	7%	14	accepted challenger
Skills intelligence	Performance and talent management	0%	20 of 162	7%	14	accepted challenger
Compliance training	Learning and development	0%	40 of 80	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Traliant at 22%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for LinkedIn Learning 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 Learning 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	2	3	0	5
GPT-5.4 mini	1	2	2	0	5
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	2	3	0	6
Perplexity Sonar	2	1	2	0	5
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	4	6	2	12
Mistral Small	0	1	5	0	6
DeepSeek V4 Flash	3	2	1	0	6
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	3	1	6
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	1	4	1	8
Kimi K2	1	4	0	0	5
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	1	3	1	7
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	3	0	4

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

Direct34 labels16

Paraphrase36 labels14

Comparative56 labels3not counted in share

Budget-constrained22 labels4

Scale-constrained20 labels2

Negative30 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative198 labels in all, every segment counted; 36 of the 40 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.

“Credential-first platforms like LinkedIn Learning, edX, and Google Career Certificates tend to grade better on consumer-friendliness” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Skills intelligence · negative prompt · first choice

“Udemy Business and LinkedIn Learning are the two industry-leading recommendations for mid-market B2B organizations” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Online course libraries · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“LinkedIn Learning is the best overall online course library for employees in a mid-market B2B company” Perplexity Sonar · Online course libraries · direct prompt · first choice

“I'd recommend LinkedIn Learning if your goal is broad, ready-to-use corporate training content” Perplexity Sonar · Online course libraries · paraphrase prompt · first choice

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.

“Avoid higher-end like LinkedIn Learning (~$380/user/year)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Online course libraries · budget prompt · hard negative

“LinkedIn Learning - not recommended for certain goals, such as software engineering skills or creative/design skills.” Llama 4 Maverick · Skills intelligence · negative prompt · soft negative

“These libraries are excellent, but very expensive for individuals (often $30/month)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Online course libraries · negative prompt · soft negative

“High cost, limited interactivity, and outdated content are the main complaints.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Learning experience plat · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LinkedIn Learning, over the 196 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LinkedIn Learning was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Udemy Business155 of 19622Compare →

Coursera for Business110 of 1968Not in the top three

Skillsoft Percipio56 of 1964Not in the top three

Docebo53 of 1966Not in the top three

Pluralsight52 of 1962Not in the top three

360Learning44 of 1963Not in the top three

TalentLMS37 of 1965Compare →

Cornerstone OnDemand35 of 1962Not in the top three

Degreed34 of 1969Not in the top three

Absorb LMS28 of 1961Not 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 Learning. 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 150 of the 196 answers that named LinkedIn Learning and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com58

goodhabitz.com51

goskills.com50

linkedin.com44

business.linkedin.com43

proprofstraining.com43

docebo.com38

elearningindustry.com32

ispringsolutions.com30

360learning.com27

416 of the 416 domain citations in answers naming LinkedIn Learning came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

goodhabitz.com/resources/blog/elearning-content-providers34

business.linkedin.com/learn/compare-plans32

ispringsolutions.com/blog/the-15-best-off-the-shelf-elearning-content-providers29

goskills.com/resources/learning-experience-platforms25

linkedin.com/pulse/corporate-learning-platforms-small-teams-practical-guide-vlad-levinas-x25

proprofstraining.com/blog/b2b-lms25

goodhabitz.com/resources/blog/best-online-learning-platforms-for-professional-team-develop24

g2.com/compare/linkedin-linkedin-learning-vs-udemy-business20

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as LinkedIn Learning

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

LinkedIn Learning for Business 2LinkedIn Learning (Teams) 1LinkedIn Learning (formerly Lynda.com) 1LinkedIn Learning Hub 1LinkedIn Learning for Individuals 1Lynda/LinkedIn 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 Learning'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 Learning, 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 linkedinlearning.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.