AI Indexes
HR AI Index
Index › Products › HubSpot · September 2026 Edition
4 categories · Named, not ranked

HubSpot

17Judge labels
0First choices
6Negative labels
6 of 12Models named it
4Categories
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.3, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
5 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. HubSpot was named 5 times in Employee onboarding and 3 other categories, where BambooHR led with 29%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In employee onboarding · 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 HubSpot 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
Employee onboardingOnboarding and employee experience0%100 of 104100%2under 10 labels · led by BambooHR at 29%
Applicant tracking systemsTalent acquisition0%23 of 500%1under 10 labels · led by Greenhouse at 47%
Employee engagement surveysOnboarding and employee experience0%55 of 76100%1under 10 labels · led by Culture Amp at 40%
Recruitment marketing and career sitesTalent acquisition0%48 of 800%1under 10 labels · led by Teamtailor at 16%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for HubSpot 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 HubSpot across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash01001
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast00011
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash00011
Llama 4 Maverick00000
Qwen 3.7 Flash01001
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00011
MiniMax M2.500000

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
Paraphrase4 labelsNone
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained2 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative10 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative17 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.

“The Best for Existing CRM Users: HubSpot ... The Catch: It is not a *dedicated* ATS.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Applicant tracking syste · budget prompt · alternative
“Best "Alternative" Recruitment Marketing CRM” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Recruitment marketing · 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.

“HubSpot – BBB complaints about: Failure to deliver promised onboarding services” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Employee onboarding · negative prompt · hard negative
“a top complaint across platforms like Salesloft, HubSpot engagement tools, etc.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Employee engagement surv · negative prompt · soft negative
“Expensive with confusing pricing, hidden fees, and spotty support” Grok 4.1 Fast · Employee onboarding · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as HubSpot, over the 17 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HubSpot was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Salesforce6 of 170Not among the top eight
Zoho Recruit5 of 172Not among the top eight
Breezy HR3 of 171Not among the top eight
Greenhouse3 of 171Not among the top eight
Bullhorn3 of 170Not among the top eight
Lever3 of 170Not among the top eight
BambooHR2 of 171Not among the top eight
Manatal2 of 171Not among the top eight
Apollo.io2 of 170Not among the top eight
Google Business Profile2 of 170Not 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 HubSpot. 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 9 of the 17 answers that named HubSpot and are not a share of its labels.

Names read as HubSpot

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as HubSpot; a claim can dispute any of them.
HubSpot (Free / Starter Tier) 1HubSpot engagement tools 1

Follow HubSpot

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

  • where HubSpot 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 HubSpot, 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 hubspot.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.