Every category where a model named Google Sheets 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
Goals and OKRs	Performance and talent management	0%	26 of 54	25%	4	under 10 labels · led by Tability at 29%
Performance management	Performance and talent management	0%	25 of 60	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Lattice at 41%
Org charts and org design	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	25 of 79	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 27%
People analytics	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	31 of 99	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by HiBob at 15%
Internal talent marketplace	Performance and talent management	0%	49 of 128	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Fuel50 at 26%
Leave and absence management	Core HR and payroll	0%	81 of 89	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by BambooHR at 28%
Succession planning	Performance and talent management	0%	96 of 99	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Lattice at 31%

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	3	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	0	1
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	1	0	3
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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained23 labels1

Scale-constrained2 labels1

Negative24 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative57 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 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.

“Use Google Sheets or Excel to manage employee profiles and opportunities” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Internal talent marketpl · budget prompt · alternative

“the free DIY route with Google Sheets + Looker Studio is unbeatable on cost” DeepSeek V4 Flash · People analytics · budget prompt · alternative

“Zero Cost & Customization | Google Sheets + Looker Studio” GLM 4.7 FlashX · People analytics · budget prompt · alternative

“Best No-Software Alternative... Zero cost, fully flexible” Grok 4.1 Fast · Goals and OKRs · budget 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.

“Using Excel, Google Sheets, or static offline templates to track your organization's succession plan is a widespread but dangerous practice.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Succession planning · negative prompt · hard negative

“Spreadsheets & Manual Tracking (Excel / Google Sheets) ... lack a proper audit trail” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Leave · negative prompt · hard negative

“spreadsheets do not scale. They inevitably suffer from "stale document syndrome"” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Google Sheets, over the 57 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Sheets was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Excel27 of 570Not among the top eight

BambooHR21 of 574Not among the top eight

Lattice15 of 572Not among the top eight

Notion15 of 570Not among the top eight

Gusto10 of 571Not among the top eight

Rippling10 of 571Not among the top eight

SAP SuccessFactors10 of 570Not among the top eight

Workday10 of 570Not among the top eight

15Five9 of 575Not among the top eight

ChartHop9 of 573Not 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 Google Sheets. 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 34 of the 57 answers that named Google Sheets and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

firsthr.app17

g2.com10

forbes.com9

okrstool.com9

mooncamp.com8

peoplemanagingpeople.com8

tability.io8

gartner.com7

selectsoftwarereviews.com7

workhuman.com7

Ninety of the ninety domain citations in answers naming Google Sheets came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

tability.io/odt/articles/best-okr-software8

mooncamp.com/blog/10-best-okr-tools7

mooncamp.com/blog/best-okr-software7

firsthr.app/compare/performance/okr-software6

jugglehire.com/blog/hr-tips/people-analytics-tools6

okrstool.com/blog/okr-tools-for-small-businesses6

effy.ai/blog/performance-management-software-for-small-business5

okrstool.com/blog/best-okr-software5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Google Sheets

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

Google Sheets + draw.io / diagrams.net 1Google Sheets templates 1Google Sheets/Notion templates 1

Follow Google Sheets

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

where Google Sheets 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 Google Sheets, 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 google.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.