HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Snagajob · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Snagajob

9Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

9 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

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Snagajob was named 4 times in Job advertising, where JobTarget led with 21%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business31 of 94

under the label threshold

Mid-market26 of 109

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In job advertising · 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 Snagajob 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
Job advertising and distribution	Talent acquisition	0%	26 of 109	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by JobTarget at 21%

Movement

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative8 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 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.

“Need hourly/frontline workers: Snagajob.” GPT-5.4 mini · Job advertising · comparative prompt · alternative

“Snagajob for hourly/temporary roles.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Job advertising · 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 Snagajob, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Snagajob was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Indeed9 of 97Not in the top three

ZipRecruiter8 of 92Not in the top three

Dice7 of 90Not in the top three

Glassdoor6 of 90Not in the top three

Handshake6 of 90Not in the top three

LinkedIn Jobs4 of 92Not in the top three

Google for Jobs4 of 91Not in the top three

LinkedIn4 of 91Not in the top three

Craigslist4 of 90Not in the top three

Wellfound4 of 90Not 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 Snagajob. 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 9 of the 9 answers that named Snagajob and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

bestjobsearchapps.com4

money.com4

noon.ai4

pin.com4

pitchmeai.com4

easyapply.com3

g2.com3

joinhomebase.com3

uschamber.com3

builtin.com2

Thirty-four of the thirty-four domain citations in answers naming Snagajob came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

money.com/best-job-posting-sites-for-employers4

noon.ai/blog/articles/143-best-job-posting-sites4

easyapply.com/blog/best-job-boards-small-business3

joinhomebase.com/blog/best-job-posting-sites-for-employers3

pin.com/blog/indeed-alternatives3

pitchmeai.com/blog/best-job-posting-sites-small-businesses3

uschamber.com/co/run/human-resources/job-posting-sites-small-businesses3

fitsmallbusiness.com/best-job-posting-sites2

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 Snagajob'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 Snagajob, 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 snagajob.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.