Every category where a model named Radancy 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
Recruitment marketing and career sites	Talent acquisition	0%	51 of 81	25%	8	under 10 labels · led by Teamtailor at 16%
Job advertising and distribution	Talent acquisition	0%	79 of 109	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by JobTarget at 21%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Radancy 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 Radancy 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	0	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	2	0	3
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	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

Direct13 labels1

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative17 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels1

Scale-constrained6 labelsNone

Negative9 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative52 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.

“Radancy | 4.7/5 (204) | ATS-tied targeting ... Pricier for complex setups.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Job advertising · direct prompt · alternative

“Best all-in-one suite: Radancy” GPT-5.4 mini · Recruitment marketing · 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.

“Avoid these if you are a mid-market or rapidly scaling company.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Recruitment marketing · negative prompt · hard negative

“custom pricing toward the enterprise end” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Job advertising · budget prompt · hard negative

“the clearest examples are the vendors whose review pages explicitly emphasize reliability/compliance checks and red-flag evaluation ... Radancy and Recruitics” Perplexity Sonar · Recruitment marketing · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Radancy, over the 52 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Radancy was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Joveo41 of 5210Not in the top three

Appcast39 of 5215Not in the top three

Phenom28 of 526Not in the top three

Beamery23 of 520Not in the top three

Recruitics15 of 520Not in the top three

Eightfold AI13 of 520Not in the top three

Greenhouse12 of 523Not in the top three

Indeed11 of 521Not in the top three

Symphony Talent11 of 520Not in the top three

iCIMS11 of 520Not 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 Radancy. 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 43 of the 52 answers that named Radancy and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com38

selectsoftwarereviews.com29

joveo.com27

guideflow.com24

adway.ai21

learn.g2.com18

builtin.com17

worldmetrics.org13

rfp.wiki11

jobcopilot.com10

208 of the 208 domain citations in answers naming Radancy came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

g2.com/discussions/what-are-the-highest-rated-programmatic-job-advertising-platforms-for-c22

g2.com/discussions/which-programmatic-job-advertising-platforms-are-the-highest-rated-for-22

guideflow.com/blog/programmatic-job-advertising-software19

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/programmatic-job-advertising-software17

builtin.com/articles/best-recruitment-marketing-tools-enterprise13

learn.g2.com/best-recruitment-marketing-platforms13

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/recruitment-marketing-software13

g2.com/compare/appcast-vs-joveo12

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 Radancy'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 Radancy, 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 radancy.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.