Every category where a model named TalentLyft 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
Recruitment marketing and career sites	Talent acquisition	4%	9 of 81	10%	10	accepted challenger
AI recruiting assistants	Talent acquisition	0%	68 of 84	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by GoPerfect at 19%

Movement

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

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

Direct6 labels2

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative11 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labels2

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative31 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 6 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.

“For most mid-market B2B companies, TalentLyft or Workable offer the best balance of features, pricing, and ease of use.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Recruitment marketing · direct prompt · first choice

“TalentLyft's free tier and Manatal's low starting price make them ideal starting points for companies with limited budgets” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Recruitment marketing · budget prompt · first choice

“all-in-one recruiting + CRM/marketing suites for small-to-mid-size businesses” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Recruitment marketing · comparative prompt · alternative

“Affordable all-in-one recruitment marketing/CRM for SMB-to-mid-market” Grok 4.1 Fast · Recruitment marketing · 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.

“SMB options like TalentLyft (~$99/mo) exist but rank lower” Grok 4.1 Fast · Recruitment marketing · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as TalentLyft, over the 31 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and TalentLyft was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Manatal17 of 314Not in the top three

Workable16 of 311Not in the top three

Phenom15 of 311Not in the top three

Beamery15 of 310Not in the top three

JazzHR13 of 314Not in the top three

100Hires13 of 312Not in the top three

Symphony Talent11 of 310Not in the top three

Teamtailor10 of 313Not in the top three

Joveo9 of 310Not in the top three

Recruitee9 of 310Not 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 TalentLyft. 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 30 of the 31 answers that named TalentLyft and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

learn.g2.com25

recruitcompare.io24

selectsoftwarereviews.com24

g2.com23

joveo.com17

peoplemanagingpeople.com14

getapp.com13

jugglehire.com10

herohunt.ai9

webtonic.io8

167 of the 167 domain citations in answers naming TalentLyft came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

learn.g2.com/best-recruitment-marketing-platforms25

recruitcompare.io/best/best-recruitment-marketing-platforms24

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/recruitment-marketing-software21

g2.com/categories/recruitment-marketing/small-business15

joveo.com/blog/top-recruitment-marketing-platforms14

g2.com/categories/recruitment-marketing11

getapp.com/all-software/recruitment-marketing-platforms/org/small-business11

jugglehire.com/blog/recruitment-software/recruitment-marketing-software10

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 TalentLyft'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 TalentLyft, 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 talentlyft.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.