Every category where a model named Microsoft PowerPoint 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
Org charts and org design	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	81 of 81	80%	10	criticized challenger
Course authoring tools	Learning and development	0%	32 of 86	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Articulate 360 at 22%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Microsoft PowerPoint 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 Microsoft PowerPoint 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	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	3	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	1	3
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained5 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative21 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative32 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Not a full authoring suite, but useful for screen-based training and tutorials - Good low-cost option for simple content” GPT-5.4 mini · Course authoring tools · budget prompt · alternative

“Use Canva or PowerPoint. ... which have decent org chart templates built-in at zero extra cost.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Org charts · budget prompt · alternative

“Best for simplicity and presentation” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · budget 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.

“You will spend hours moving boxes in PowerPoint or Visio only to have the document become obsolete by next week.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Org charts · negative prompt · hard negative

“Why you should avoid them: They treat org charts as static illustrations rather than dynamic databases.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · negative prompt · hard negative

“Manual/static tools like PowerPoint, Excel, or Visio: Widely criticized for becoming outdated quickly” Grok 4.1 Fast · Org charts · negative prompt · hard negative

“trying to maintain an org chart in PowerPoint, Visio, or Lucidchart is a losing battle” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · scale prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Microsoft PowerPoint, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Microsoft PowerPoint was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Lucidchart25 of 321Not in the top three

Microsoft Visio23 of 320Not in the top three

Organimi18 of 327Not in the top three

Miro17 of 320Not in the top three

ChartHop16 of 325Not in the top three

OrgChart13 of 323Not in the top three

Pingboard12 of 321Not in the top three

Excel11 of 320Not in the top three

draw.io9 of 321Not in the top three

Canva9 of 320Not 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 Microsoft PowerPoint. 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 21 of the 32 answers that named Microsoft PowerPoint and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

orgchartstudio.com15

theorgchart.com15

gartner.com14

forbes.com13

g2.com11

peerdom.com11

teamohana.com11

muchskills.com10

learn.g2.com8

onedirectory.com8

116 of the 116 domain citations in answers naming Microsoft PowerPoint came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

forbes.com/advisor/business/software/best-org-chart-software13

gartner.com/reviews/market/org-chart-software13

peerdom.com/blog/best-org-chart-software11

teamohana.com/blog/org-chart-software11

muchskills.com/best-org-chart-review10

learn.g2.com/best-org-chart-software8

orgchartstudio.com/blog/org-chart-software-comparison8

theorgchart.com/resources/best-org-chart-software-for-large-companies8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Microsoft PowerPoint

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

PowerPoint 8Camtasia + PowerPoint 1PowerPoint SmartArt 1PowerPoint/SmartArt 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 Microsoft PowerPoint'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 Microsoft PowerPoint, 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 microsoft.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.