Every category where a model named Tableau 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
People analytics	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	97 of 99	55%	11	criticized challenger
Workforce planning	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	76 of 89	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 31%

Movement

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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labelsNone

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained6 labelsNone

Negative9 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative28 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.

“The Technical Solution: Looker / Tableau + Data Warehouse” Qwen 3.7 Flash · People analytics · direct 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.

“basic BI templates (such as generic PowerBI or Tableau HR dashboards) ... lack automated data pipelines” Gemini 3.5 Flash · People analytics · negative prompt · soft negative

“Powerful visualization, customizable dashboards, works with any data source, steep learning curve” GLM 4.7 FlashX · People analytics · comparative prompt · soft negative

“pipe data from their ATS ... into Microsoft PowerBI or Tableau... Cons: High maintenance” Qwen 3.7 Flash · People analytics · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

“do not have the resources to configure BI tools like Tableau or Power BI” Gemini 3.5 Flash · People analytics · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Tableau, over the 28 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Tableau was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Visier24 of 2810Not in the top three

Microsoft Power BI18 of 280Not in the top three

ChartHop15 of 284Not in the top three

Crunchr13 of 282Not in the top three

One Model13 of 281Not in the top three

BambooHR12 of 285Not in the top three

SAP SuccessFactors12 of 280Not in the top three

Workday People Analytics12 of 280Not in the top three

Culture Amp11 of 280Not in the top three

Lattice9 of 281Not 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 Tableau. 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 12 of the 28 answers that named Tableau and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

eletive.com10

hrbench.com9

thrivesparrow.com7

peoplemanagingpeople.com6

engagedly.com5

leapsome.com5

selectsoftwarereviews.com5

adp.com4

firsthr.app4

hr.university4

Fifty-nine of the fifty-nine domain citations in answers naming Tableau came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

eletive.com/blog/people-analytics-tools10

hrbench.com/blog/best-people-analytics-software9

thrivesparrow.com/blog/best-people-analytics-software7

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-people-analytics-software6

engagedly.com/blog/best-hr-analytics-softwares5

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/analytics-tools5

adp.com/resources/articles-and-insights/articles/p/people-analytics-pitfalls.aspx4

hr.university/tools/hr-analytics-software4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Tableau

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

Tableau (People Analytics) 1Tableau / ThoughtSpot 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 Tableau'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 Tableau, 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 tableau.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.