Every category where a model named Planful 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
Workforce planning	Workforce planning and analytics	8%	5 of 89	4%	23	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct8 labels2

Paraphrase7 labels3

Comparative16 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative39 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 6 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.

“Planful often being the better fit if you want a more approachable mid-market FP&A tool that includes workforce planning” GPT-5.4 mini · Workforce planning · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“I'd recommend starting with Planful if you have 200+ employees and want strong finance integration” MiniMax M2.5 · Workforce planning · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Best Overall for Finance & HR Collaboration: Planful” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Workforce planning · direct prompt · first choice

“My near-universal top pick for mid-market B2B: Planful” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Workforce planning · 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.

“Planful/PlanGuru — but these are usually more expensive” GPT-5.4 mini · Workforce planning · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Planful, over the 39 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Planful was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Workday Adaptive Planning34 of 396Not in the top three

Anaplan28 of 395Not in the top three

Visier17 of 390Not in the top three

ChartHop16 of 394Not in the top three

Pigment13 of 391Not in the top three

Orgvue10 of 390Not in the top three

SAP SuccessFactors9 of 390Not in the top three

OneStream8 of 393Not in the top three

Rippling8 of 392Not in the top three

HiBob8 of 391Not 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 Planful. 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 34 of the 39 answers that named Planful and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

guideflow.com20

learn.g2.com17

hrtechsaas.com16

peoplemanagingpeople.com15

worldmetrics.org12

selectsoftwarereviews.com10

articsledge.com9

resources.rework.com9

coefficient.io8

drivetrain.ai7

123 of the 123 domain citations in answers naming Planful came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/workforce-planning-software17

hrtechsaas.com/blog/workforce-planning-software16

learn.g2.com/best-workforce-planning-software12

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-workforce-planning-software12

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/workforce-planning-software10

articsledge.com/post/workforce-planning-software9

coefficient.io/cfo-resources/strategic-workforce-planning-tools8

eresourcescheduler.com/blog/top-10-workforce-planning-tools7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 Planful'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 Planful, 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 planful.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.