Every category where a model named Plum 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
Candidate assessment	Talent acquisition	0%	19 of 101	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by TestGorilla at 68%
Succession planning	Performance and talent management	0%	27 of 99	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by Lattice at 31%

Movement

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

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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labels1

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative15 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.

“Great for identifying potential and leadership readiness using science-backed behavioral assessments” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Succession planning · scale prompt · alternative

“Criteria Corp or Plum | If you have a dedicated HR Ops team” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Candidate assessment · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Best for Science-Based Behavioral Assessment” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Succession planning · comparative prompt · alternative

“Plum — Best for Culture Fit & Potential” Kimi K2 · Candidate assessment · direct 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 Plum, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Plum was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

TestGorilla7 of 154Not in the top three

Criteria Corp7 of 152Not in the top three

HackerRank5 of 150Not in the top three

SAP SuccessFactors4 of 151Not in the top three

Codility4 of 150Not in the top three

Cornerstone OnDemand4 of 150Not in the top three

TalentGuard4 of 150Not in the top three

The Predictive Index4 of 150Not in the top three

iMocha4 of 150Not in the top three

Harver3 of 150Not 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 Plum. 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 10 of the 15 answers that named Plum and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com6

jobcannon.io5

adaface.com4

criteriacorp.com4

firsthr.app4

getapp.com4

peoplemanagingpeople.com4

testgorilla.com4

assessmentday.co.uk3

capterra.com3

Forty-one of the forty-one domain citations in answers naming Plum came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

jobcannon.io/compare/best-pre-employment-assessments5

adaface.com/blog/pre-employment-assessment-tools4

getapp.com/hr-employee-management-software/pre-employment-testing/org/mid-size-business4

jobcannon.io/compare/top-5-hiring-assessment-platforms4

assessmentday.co.uk/resources/best-candidate-assessments-mid-sized.html3

criteriacorp.com/compare/testgorilla3

firsthr.app/compare/performance/talent-assessment-tools3

g2.com/categories/succession-planning/small-business3

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 Plum'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 Plum, 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 plumestudio.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.