Every category where a model named Spidergap 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
360 feedback	Performance and talent management	0%	15 of 77	3%	35	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct21 labels1

Paraphrase14 labels3

Comparative26 labels7not counted in share

Budget-constrained17 labels2

Scale-constrained8 labels2

Negative18 labels4not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative104 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 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.

“Best for: Dedicated, no‑nonsense 360 tool with pay‑per‑assessment pricing ... Pure 360 focus” GLM 4.7 FlashX · 360 feedback · comparative prompt · first choice

“The most frequently top-ranked are Spidergap... Pure 360 focus; cheapest for infrequent use” Grok 4.1 Fast · 360 feedback · comparative prompt · first choice

“Safer picks: Start with highly rated, purpose-built ones like Spidergap (standalone 360s)” Grok 4.1 Fast · 360 feedback · negative prompt · first choice

“The most popular pure-play 360 tool... a dedicated tool like Spidergap is ideal” DeepSeek V4 Flash · 360 feedback · comparative 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.

“More established 360-focused platform, but usually pricier: Spidergap” GPT-5.4 mini · 360 feedback · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Spidergap, over the 104 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Spidergap was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Lattice78 of 10414Not in the top three

Culture Amp75 of 10412Not in the top three

15Five42 of 1040Not in the top three

Leapsome42 of 1040Not in the top three

Betterworks39 of 10410Not in the top three

Primalogik32 of 1047Not in the top three

SurveyMonkey32 of 1040Not in the top three

EchoSpan31 of 1042Not in the top three

Qualtrics30 of 1043Not in the top three

Small Improvements26 of 1044Not 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 Spidergap. 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 91 of the 104 answers that named Spidergap and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

feedbackpulse.com75

nanoglobals.com71

betterworks.com68

workhuman.com63

teamflect.com44

peoplemanagingpeople.com39

guideflow.com34

engagedly.com31

firsthr.app25

business.com24

474 of the 474 domain citations in answers naming Spidergap came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

nanoglobals.com/recommended/360-degree-feedback-tools71

betterworks.com/magazine/best-360-degree-feedback-tools68

workhuman.com/blog/best-360-degree-feedback-software-tools62

feedbackpulse.com/resources/360-feedback-tools56

feedbackpulse.com/resources/best-360-review-software39

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-360-degree-feedback-software39

teamflect.com/blog/hr-tech/best-360-feedback-tools38

guideflow.com/blog/360-feedback-software33

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Spidergap

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Spidergap; a claim can dispute any of them.

SpiderGap 1Spidergap 360˚ Feedback 1

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 Spidergap'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 Spidergap, 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 spidergap.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.