Every category where a model named Ravio 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	4%	8 of 189	4%	28	accepted challenger
Pay equity	Compensation and total rewards	2%	12 of 60	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by Syndio at 17%
Compensation benchmarking data	Compensation and total rewards	0%	20 of 144	0%	22	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Ravio 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 Ravio 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	2	1	0	3
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	6	0	0	7
Perplexity Sonar	1	3	2	0	6
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	5	3	0	9
Mistral Small	0	3	1	0	4
DeepSeek V4 Flash	2	4	2	0	8
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	2	0	0	2
Kimi K2	1	2	1	0	4
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	4	1	0	6
MiniMax M2.5	0	3	2	0	5

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

Direct20 labels1

Paraphrase18 labels4

Comparative28 labels4not counted in share

Budget-constrained39 labels4

Scale-constrained17 labels3

Negative17 labels3not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative139 labels in all, every segment counted; 12 of the 19 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.

“If you want a single default pick without more details, I'd say Ravio for a typical mid-sized B2B company” Perplexity Sonar · Pay equity · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“pulls live, anonymized data directly from HR and payroll systems (e.g., Pave, Ravio, or Figures)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Compensation benchmarkin · negative prompt · first choice

“Pave, Comprehensive, and Ravio all offer free tiers for small teams” Kimi K2 · Compensation management · budget prompt · first choice

“I'd start with Pave/Ravio/Comprehensive free tiers” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Compensation management · budget 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.

“Ravio is mentioned as being suitable for global tech companies, but not for companies with few tech roles” Llama 4 Maverick · Compensation management · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Ravio, over the 128 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Ravio was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Pave102 of 12844Not in the top three

Payscale63 of 1287Not in the top three

Salary.com44 of 1282Not in the top three

Mercer40 of 1285Not in the top three

Comprehensive.io37 of 1287Not in the top three

Radford35 of 1284Not in the top three

Comprehensive30 of 1288Not in the top three

BambooHR29 of 1283Not in the top three

beqom27 of 1288Not in the top three

Salary.com CompAnalyst27 of 1284Not 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 Ravio. 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 112 of the 128 answers that named Ravio and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ravio.comYour site81

comprehensive.io73

gartner.com45

g2.com39

worldmetrics.org39

firsthr.app38

learn.g2.com35

peoplemanagingpeople.com35

hibob.com31

salarycube.com29

364 of the 445 domain citations in answers naming Ravio came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

comprehensive.io/content/best-compensation-management-software47

ravio.com/blog/the-best-tools-for-salary-benchmarking44

ravio.com/blog/compensation-benchmarking-companies39

firsthr.app/compare/payroll/compensation-management-tools38

gartner.com/reviews/market/compensation-management-software37

learn.g2.com/best-compensation-management-software35

hibob.com/blog/best-compensation-management-software31

comprehensive.io/content/best-compensation-benchmarking-data-sources30

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 Ravio'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 Ravio, 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 ravio.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.