HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Qualaroo · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Qualaroo

2Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

2 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.1, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Qualaroo was named 1 time in 360 feedback, where Lattice led with 40%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market36 of 77

under the label threshold

Enterprise45 of 50

under the label threshold

In 360 feedback · 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 Qualaroo 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
360 feedback	Performance and talent management	0%	36 of 77	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Lattice at 40%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 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.

“Budget/small teams: SurveyMonkey, Qualaroo” MiniMax M2.5 · 360 feedback · 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 Qualaroo, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Qualaroo was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

FeedbackPulse2 of 21Not in the top three

SurveyMonkey2 of 20Not in the top three

Teamflect2 of 20Not in the top three

15Five1 of 20Not in the top three

Betterworks1 of 20Not in the top three

Culture Amp1 of 20Not in the top three

EchoSpan1 of 20Not in the top three

Effy AI1 of 20Not in the top three

G360 Surveys1 of 20Not in the top three

Lattice1 of 20Not 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 Qualaroo. 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 2 of the 2 answers that named Qualaroo and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

betterworks.com2

feedbackpulse.com2

teamflect.com2

axell.app1

bizbot.com1

cxeverywhere.com1

disruptivehr.com1

effy.ai1

engagedly.com1

envisialearning.com1

Thirteen of the thirteen domain citations in answers naming Qualaroo came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

betterworks.com/magazine/best-360-degree-feedback-tools2

feedbackpulse.com/resources/360-feedback-tools2

teamflect.com/blog/hr-tech/best-360-feedback-tools2

axell.app/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-360-degree-feedback1

bizbot.com/blog/choosing-360-feedback-software-checklist1

cxeverywhere.com/tools/top-360-feedback-software1

disruptivehr.com/should-we-bother-with-360-feedback1

effy.ai/blog/360-feedback-software1

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 Qualaroo'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 Qualaroo, 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 qualaroo.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.