AI Indexes
HR AI Index
Index › Products › Gartner · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

Gartner

25Judge labels
0First choices
5Negative labels
12 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.
Best standing
0% in Compensation benchmarkin for enterprise buyers
Rank 21 of 141 in the mid-market standing
0 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 8 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
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 Gartner 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Compensation benchmarking dataCompensation and total rewards0%21 of 1410%8under 10 labels · led by Payscale at 24%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Gartner 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 Gartner across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500101
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00101
Grok 4.1 Fast01001
Mistral Small01001
DeepSeek V4 Flash00000
Llama 4 Maverick00101
Qwen 3.7 Flash10001
Kimi K201001
GLM 4.7 FlashX00000
MiniMax M2.500101

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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative16 labels3not counted in share
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative8 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative25 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 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.

“Strategic insight → Gartner” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Compensation benchmarkin · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best for IT spending, staffing, and technology benchmarking, with interpreted peer comparisons.” Mistral Small · Compensation benchmarkin · comparative prompt · alternative
“Peer comparisons with governance insights; large IT metrics database.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Compensation benchmarkin · comparative prompt · alternative
“IT peer comparisons & governance documentation | Gartner” Kimi K2 · Compensation benchmarkin · 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 Gartner, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Gartner was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Deloitte16 of 256Not among the top eight
KPMG16 of 250Not among the top eight
Computer Economics15 of 250Not among the top eight
Forrester15 of 250Not among the top eight
EY11 of 250Not among the top eight
PwC11 of 250Not among the top eight
IDC10 of 250Not among the top eight
NielsenIQ8 of 250Not among the top eight
BCG7 of 250Not among the top eight
Bain & Company7 of 250Not 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 Gartner. 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 23 of the 25 answers that named Gartner and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

worldmetrics.org20
zipdo.co18
gitnux.org15
gartner.comYour site7
ftop.ch6
ravio.com5
isg-one.com4
library.hbs.edu4
linkedin.com4
thehackettgroup.com4

Eighty of the eighty-seven domain citations in answers naming Gartner came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Gartner

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

  • where Gartner 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 Gartner, 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 gartner.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.