| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pay equity | Compensation and total rewards | 14% | 3 of 60 | 4% | 26 | accepted challenger |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Known for robust benchmark-linked pay gap reporting and documented inputs for remediation decisions, making it a strong fit for mid-size teams.” Mistral Small · Pay equity · direct prompt · first choice
“the strongest fit is usually PayAnalytics because it explicitly positions itself for teams *working within a set budget*” Perplexity Sonar · Pay equity · budget prompt · first choice
“The Best All-Rounder: PayAnalytics ... often the go-to recommendation for mid-sized companies” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Pay equity · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“PayAnalytics is the market leader... Choose PayAnalytics if you have a global B2B workforce” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Pay equity · direct prompt · first choice
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.
“Enterprise tools like ... PayAnalytics ... out of reach on a tight budget” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Pay equity · budget prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 70 of the 77 answers that named PayAnalytics and are not a share of its labels.
334 of the 364 domain citations in answers naming PayAnalytics came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
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 PayAnalytics'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 PayAnalytics, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for PayAnalytics by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
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 payanalytics.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.
PayAnalytics is among the products AI models recommend first in Pay equity this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of September 2026.
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.