HR AI Index

Index › Products › Eletive · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Eletive

15Judge labels

0First choices

7Negative labels

8 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

6 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Eletive was named 6 times in People analytics, where HiBob led with 15%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business92 of 96

under the label threshold

Mid-market23 of 99

under the label threshold

Enterprise17 of 68

under the label threshold

In people analytics · 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 Eletive 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%	23 of 99	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by HiBob at 15%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Eletive yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Eletive across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

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	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative7 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative15 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

“Look at lightweight tools like Eletive (pulse + analytics)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · People analytics · negative prompt · first choice

“Strong focus on engagement and continuous feedback, but not suitable for companies under 100 employees.” Mistral Small · People analytics · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for: Mid-market organizations (100–5,000 employees) focused on continuous listening” MiniMax M2.5 · People analytics · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best For: Organizations focused on culture, retention risks, and real-time sentiment” Qwen 3.7 Flash · People analytics · 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 Eletive, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Eletive was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Visier14 of 156Not among the top eight

Workday People Analytics13 of 151Not among the top eight

One Model12 of 150Not among the top eight

BambooHR8 of 153Not among the top eight

Crunchr8 of 150Not among the top eight

Lattice5 of 152Not among the top eight

Culture Amp5 of 151Not among the top eight

ChartHop5 of 150Not among the top eight

SAP SuccessFactors5 of 150Not among the top eight

Leapsome4 of 150Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 Eletive. 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 15 of the 15 answers that named Eletive and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

eletive.comYour site15

hrbench.com13

thrivesparrow.com10

workhuman.com6

adp.com5

bangaloreorbit.com5

hr.software4

jugglehire.com4

leapsome.com4

peoplemanagingpeople.com4

Fifty-five of the seventy domain citations in answers naming Eletive came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

eletive.com/blog/people-analytics-tools15

hrbench.com/blog/best-people-analytics-software13

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

workhuman.com/blog/people-analytics-software6

bangaloreorbit.com/blog/top-10-hr-analytics-platforms-features-pros-cons-comparison5

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

jugglehire.com/blog/hr-tips/people-analytics-tools4

leapsome.com/comparisons/people-analytics-tools4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Eletive

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

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 Eletive'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 Eletive, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

With a new claim: the vendor brief

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Eletive by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Eletive is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name Eletive, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.

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 eletive.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.