Every category where a model named SuccessionStack 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
Succession planning	Performance and talent management	4%	7 of 99	0%	14	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SuccessionStack 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 SuccessionStack across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1	2
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	2	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	1	1	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	2	0	3
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct9 labels2

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative8 labelsNone

Budget-constrained7 labels1

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative25 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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 succession planning is a strategic priority and you want best-in-class depth without enterprise complexity → SuccessionStack” Kimi K2 · Succession planning · direct prompt · first choice

“Engagedly, Lattice, Dayforce, or SuccessionStack strike the best balance of functionality, usability, and pricing” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Succession planning · direct prompt · first choice

“if you want succession as the entire product, choose a dedicated tool (SuccessionStack, TalentGuard, SuccessionNow)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Succession planning · comparative prompt · alternative

“For a truly limited budget with \u226420 employees: Start with SuccessionStack\u2019s free templates” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Succession planning · budget 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 SuccessionStack, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SuccessionStack was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Lattice17 of 252Not in the top three

SuccessionNow14 of 253Not in the top three

TalentGuard11 of 252Not in the top three

SAP SuccessFactors10 of 251Not in the top three

Engagedly8 of 255Not in the top three

Leapsome8 of 250Not in the top three

Empxtrack7 of 252Not in the top three

PeopleFluent7 of 250Not in the top three

Workday7 of 250Not in the top three

ChartHop6 of 250Not 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 SuccessionStack. 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 24 of the 25 answers that named SuccessionStack and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

successionstack.comYour site24

talentguard.com20

firsthr.app18

engagedly.com14

gartner.com12

guideflow.com12

softwareadvice.com11

monday.com10

worldmetrics.org10

skillpanel.com8

115 of the 139 domain citations in answers naming SuccessionStack came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

successionstack.com/best-succession-planning-software21

talentguard.com/blog/10-best-role-readiness-planning-software-for-202520

firsthr.app/compare/performance/succession-planning-software18

engagedly.com/blog/best-succession-planning-softwares14

gartner.com/reviews/market/succession-planning-technology12

guideflow.com/blog/succession-planning-software12

monday.com/blog/project-management/succession-planning-software10

softwareadvice.com/hr/succession-planning-comparison10

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 SuccessionStack'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 SuccessionStack, 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 successionstack.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.