HR AI Index

Index › Products › Figures.hr · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Figures.hr

7Judge labels

1First choices

0Negative labels

3 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

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Figures.hr was named 3 times in Compensation benchmarkin, where Payscale led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business67 of 166

under the label threshold

Mid-market38 of 141

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In compensation benchmarkin · 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 Figures.hr 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
Compensation benchmarking data	Compensation and total rewards	0%	38 of 141	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Payscale at 24%

Movement

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

ShowHide

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

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained3 labels1

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative7 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 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.

“Real-time benchmarking platforms (like Ravio, Pave, Figures HR) often provide more accurate, current data” MiniMax M2.5 · Compensation benchmarkin · negative 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 Figures.hr, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Figures.hr was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Ravio6 of 60Not among the top eight

Pave5 of 63Not among the top eight

Payscale3 of 61Not among the top eight

Salary.com3 of 60Not among the top eight

Comprehensive2 of 61Not among the top eight

BambooHR2 of 60Not among the top eight

Comprehensive.io2 of 60Not among the top eight

Comptool2 of 60Not among the top eight

Salary.com CompAnalyst2 of 60Not among the top eight

SalaryCube2 of 60Not 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 Figures.hr. 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 5 of the 6 answers that named Figures.hr and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ravio.com5

salarycube.com4

worldmetrics.org4

comprehensive.io3

deel.com3

captivateiq.com2

g2.com2

guideflow.com2

hibob.com2

hrtechsaas.com2

Twenty-nine of the twenty-nine domain citations in answers naming Figures.hr came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

ravio.com/blog/compensation-benchmarking-companies4

ravio.com/blog/the-best-tools-for-salary-benchmarking3

salarycube.com/compensation/best-salary-benchmarking-tools3

captivateiq.com/blog/compensation-benchmarking-software2

comprehensive.io/content/best-compensation-management-software2

deel.com/blog/10-compensation-management-systems-mid-size-companies2

guideflow.com/blog/salary-benchmarking-software2

hibob.com/blog/best-compensation-management-software2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Figures.hr

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

Figures HR 1figures.hr 1

Follow Figures.hr

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 Figures.hr'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 Figures.hr, 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 Figures.hr by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Figures.hr 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 Figures.hr, 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 figures.hr 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.