Mid-marketnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 14 of 74, unchanged
MentorFlow
2Judge labels
1First choices
0Negative labels
1 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. MentorFlow was named 2 times in Mentoring software, where Together led with 28%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market14 of 77
2%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In mentoring software · 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 MentorFlow 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentoring software | Learning and development | 2% | 14 of 77 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Together at 28% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, MentorFlow held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Mentoring software · by segment
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentoring software | 0% | 2% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now. | New this edition | Rank 14 of 77, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 13 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated MentorFlow across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated MentorFlow across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 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 label1
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.
“Top Pick: MentorFlow ... It aligns perfectly with ROI-focused cultures.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Mentoring software · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose Mentorflow if you want to launch a program quickly, have a limited budget” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Mentoring software · 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 MentorFlow, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and MentorFlow was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as MentorFlow, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and MentorFlow was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
Names read as MentorFlow
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as MentorFlow; a claim can dispute any of them.
Mentorflow 1
Follow MentorFlow
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
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 MentorFlow'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 MentorFlow, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for MentorFlow by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where MentorFlow is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name MentorFlow, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.