Every category where a model named SmartDraw 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
Org charts and org design	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	20 of 81	17%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct11 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative15 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative9 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative38 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.

“SmartDraw - Best for ease of use with templates and collaboration features” MiniMax M2.5 · Org charts · direct prompt · alternative

“Easy professional-looking org charts from templates and imports” Perplexity Sonar · Org charts · comparative prompt · alternative

“Low\u2011cost flat pricing | SmartDraw, Organimi, Peerdom” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Org charts · comparative prompt · alternative

“Great all-in-one but static org charts.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Org charts · 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.

“Tools like Microsoft Visio, Lucidchart, SmartDraw, and Miro... dangerous for official organizational documentation” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Org charts · negative prompt · hard negative

“SmartDraw performance lags on large boards with many collaborators, and has a steep onboarding curve.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Org charts · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SmartDraw, over the 38 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SmartDraw was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Lucidchart34 of 385Not in the top three

Microsoft Visio30 of 381Not in the top three

ChartHop26 of 386Not in the top three

Pingboard25 of 380Not in the top three

OrgChart23 of 386Not in the top three

Organimi23 of 386Not in the top three

Creately19 of 380Not in the top three

Miro16 of 380Not in the top three

OneDirectory14 of 383Not in the top three

Ingentis org.manager11 of 384Not 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 SmartDraw. 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 37 of the 38 answers that named SmartDraw and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com29

theorgchart.com28

learn.g2.com24

forbes.com20

orgchartstudio.com18

peoplemanagingpeople.com17

g2.com15

firsthr.app14

happeo.com14

peerdom.com14

193 of the 193 domain citations in answers naming SmartDraw came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/org-chart-software29

learn.g2.com/best-org-chart-software24

theorgchart.com/resources/best-org-chart-software23

forbes.com/advisor/business/software/best-org-chart-software20

orgchartstudio.com/blog/org-chart-software-comparison17

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-org-chart-tools16

firsthr.app/compare/general/org-chart-software14

happeo.com/blog/org-chart-software14

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 SmartDraw'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 SmartDraw, 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 smartdraw.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.