HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Sapia.ai · September 2026 Edition

4 categories · Named, not ranked

Sapia.ai

8Judge labels

1First choices

1Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

4Categories

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

Standing

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Sapia.ai was named 5 times in AI recruiting assistants and 3 other categories, where GoPerfect led with 19%. 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-market33 of 84

under the label threshold

Enterprise12 of 53

under the label threshold

In ai recruiting assistants · 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 Sapia.ai 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
AI recruiting assistants	Talent acquisition	0%	33 of 84	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by GoPerfect at 19%
Interview scheduling	Talent acquisition	0%	34 of 72	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 21%
Skills intelligence	Performance and talent management	0%	64 of 162	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by TalentGuard at 19%
Talent intelligence	Performance and talent management	0%	59 of 77	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Pin at 17%

Movement

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

Paraphrase3 labels1

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 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.

“the AI schedules the next-step interview automatically, reducing applicant drop-off in high-volume queues” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Interview scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative

“relies on conversational AI (chat-based assessments) to analyze behavioral and soft-skill signals” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Skills intelligence · comparative prompt · alternative

“or Sapia.ai if you have higher application volumes” Claude Haiku 4.5 · AI recruiting assistants · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Sapia.ai (if bias reduction is a priority)” MiniMax M2.5 · AI recruiting assistants · paraphrase 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 Sapia.ai, over the 8 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sapia.ai was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Eightfold AI3 of 81Not in the top three

Gloat3 of 81Not in the top three

Paradox3 of 80Not in the top three

Pin2 of 81Not in the top three

Workable2 of 81Not in the top three

Fuel502 of 80Not in the top three

HireVue2 of 80Not in the top three

GoPerfect1 of 81Not in the top three

GoodTime1 of 81Not in the top three

Arya1 of 80Not 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 Sapia.ai. 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 6 of the 8 answers that named Sapia.ai and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

joveo.com3

learn.g2.com3

pin.com3

sapia.aiYour site3

gomokka.com2

goperfect.com2

guideflow.com2

heymilo.ai2

hiretruffle.com2

selectsoftwarereviews.com2

Twenty-one of the twenty-four domain citations in answers naming Sapia.ai came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

joveo.com/blog/best-ai-candidate-screening-tools3

gomokka.com/resources/12-best-ai-screening-tools-for-recruiters-in-2026.html2

learn.g2.com/best-talent-intelligence-software2

sapia.ai/resources/blog/talent-intelligence-platforms2

thehirehub.ai/blog/ai-candidate-screening-tools2

365talents.com/en/resources/skills-intelligence-platform-buyers-guide1

asymbl.com/blog/best-talent-intelligence-software-for-staffing-in-20261

bestrecruitingtools.com/blog/best-talent-intelligence-platforms-enterprise-20261

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 Sapia.ai'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 Sapia.ai, 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 sapia.ai 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.