Every category where a model named Payscale Ascent 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
Compensation management	Compensation and total rewards	5%	6 of 189	6%	16	accepted challenger
Compensation benchmarking data	Compensation and total rewards	0%	77 of 144	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Payscale at 24%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	1	1	1	3
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	1	2	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	0	2
Mistral Small	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	2	0	2
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	0	2

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

Direct19 labels3

Paraphrase7 labels2

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative31 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 5 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.

“I'd usually recommend Comprehensive or Payscale Ascent as the best starting points” Perplexity Sonar · Compensation management · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“HiBob or Payscale Ascent are top choices if you want an integrated HR platform” Mistral Small · Compensation management · direct prompt · first choice

“or Payscale Ascent if compensation benchmarking and pay equity are the priority” GPT-5.4 mini · Compensation management · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“starting with Paylocity or Payscale Ascent if you need strong market data” MiniMax M2.5 · Compensation management · direct 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.

“strong for benchmarking and pay structures, but likely more than a very tight budget wants” GPT-5.4 mini · Compensation management · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Payscale Ascent, over the 24 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Payscale Ascent was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Salary.com13 of 242Not in the top three

CompLogix8 of 244Not in the top three

HiBob8 of 243Not in the top three

CaptivateIQ8 of 241Not in the top three

beqom7 of 242Not in the top three

Lattice6 of 240Not in the top three

Pave5 of 241Not in the top three

SalaryCube5 of 241Not in the top three

Xactly5 of 240Not in the top three

Comprehensive4 of 241Not 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 Payscale Ascent. 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 24 of the 24 answers that named Payscale Ascent and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com17

learn.g2.com16

comprehensive.io14

g2.com11

hibob.com11

guideflow.com9

worldmetrics.org8

captivateiq.com7

complogix.io7

deel.com7

107 of the 107 domain citations in answers naming Payscale Ascent came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/compensation-management-software16

learn.g2.com/best-compensation-management-software16

comprehensive.io/content/best-compensation-management-software14

hibob.com/blog/best-compensation-management-software11

darwinbox.com/blog/8-best-compensation-management-software-enterprises6

deel.com/blog/10-compensation-management-systems-mid-size-companies6

captivateiq.com/blog/best-compensation-management-software5

guideflow.com/blog/compensation-planning-software5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Payscale Ascent

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

Payscale Ascent (formerly Payfactors) 7Payscale Ascent / Payfactors 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 Payscale Ascent'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 Payscale Ascent, 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 payscale.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.