HR AI Index

Index › Products › Oboard · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Oboard

5Judge labels

1First choices

3Negative 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. Oboard was named 3 times in Goals and OKRs, where Tability led with 29%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market49 of 54

under the label threshold

Enterprise11 of 53

under the label threshold

In goals and okrs · 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 Oboard 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%	49 of 54	67%	3	under 10 labels · led by Tability at 29%

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
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	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0

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

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained1 label1

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 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.

“Connecting developer sprint work to high-level goals | Oboard (Jira)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Goals and OKRs · 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.

“Oboard (3.1/5, struggles with scaling hierarchies and setup)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · hard negative

“Failed basic setup scenarios in testing” Kimi K2 · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Oboard, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Oboard was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Profit.co5 of 51Not among the top eight

WorkBoard5 of 50Not among the top eight

Perdoo4 of 51Not among the top eight

Quantive4 of 50Not among the top eight

Teamflect4 of 50Not among the top eight

Tability3 of 52Not among the top eight

15Five2 of 50Not among the top eight

Asana2 of 50Not among the top eight

Cascade Strategy2 of 50Not among the top eight

Lattice2 of 50Not 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 Oboard. 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 3 of the 5 answers that named Oboard and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

bigideasdb.com3

mooncamp.com3

okrstool.com3

tability.io3

brev.io2

capterra.com2

engagedly.com2

g2.com2

gartner.com2

medium.com2

Twenty-four of the twenty-four domain citations in answers naming Oboard came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

bigideasdb.com/software/objectives-and-key-results-okr3

mooncamp.com/blog/best-okr-software3

okrstool.com/blog/best-okr-software3

tability.io/odt/articles/best-okr-software-for-enterprise3

capterra.com/okr-software2

engagedly.com/blog/best-okr-softwares2

gartner.com/reviews/market/okr-software2

medium.com/@rajalakshmimuthu12341/okr-software-9f40f3e945132

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Oboard

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

Oboard (OKR Board for Jira) 1

Follow Oboard

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

where Oboard 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 Oboard, 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 oboard.io 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.