Every category where a model named Quantive 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	2%	13 of 54	30%	27	criticized challenger

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	3	1	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1	1	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	2	1	3
Mistral Small	0	0	3	1	4
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	0	0	2
Kimi K2	0	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	1	1	2

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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase10 labels3

Comparative15 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained10 labelsNone

Negative19 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative64 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 5 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.

“dedicated OKR platforms offer deeper analytics than HR-focused tools” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Goals and OKRs · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Large, data‑driven orgs → Quantive” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Goals and OKRs · comparative prompt · first choice

“Choose Quantive or Microsoft Viva Goals if you're a large enterprise needing deep data integration” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Goals and OKRs · comparative prompt · alternative

“If you're a large enterprise strategy office: consider Quantive or WorkBoard” GPT-5.4 mini · 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.

“Ally.io, Koan, 7Geese, Gtmhub... described as no longer existing in their original form or being discontinued.” Perplexity Sonar · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · hard negative

“standalone Gtmhub have been discontinued or absorbed into other companies, leaving users without support” Mistral Small · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · hard negative

“standalone Gtmhub/Quantive (now Workboard-absorbed) ... No migration paths; data risks.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · hard negative

“acquired by Workboard in May 2025. Customers are being forcibly migrated” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Goals and OKRs · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Quantive, over the 62 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Quantive was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

WorkBoard41 of 625Not among the top eight

Lattice40 of 621Not among the top eight

Profit.co37 of 626Not among the top eight

Betterworks36 of 626Not among the top eight

Perdoo33 of 625Not among the top eight

Tability29 of 6213Not among the top eight

Mooncamp25 of 621Not among the top eight

Weekdone21 of 621Not among the top eight

Ally.io21 of 620Not among the top eight

15Five20 of 620Not 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 Quantive. 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 50 of the 62 answers that named Quantive and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

tability.io42

okrstool.com40

mooncamp.com30

toolradar.com25

profit.co22

topickz.com20

gartner.com17

teamflect.com17

guideflow.com14

worxmate.ai14

241 of the 241 domain citations in answers naming Quantive came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

mooncamp.com/blog/best-okr-software26

tability.io/odt/articles/best-okr-software-for-enterprise26

toolradar.com/guides/best-okr-software25

gartner.com/reviews/market/okr-software17

okrstool.com/blog/best-okr-software16

profit.co/blog/okr-university/enterprise-okr-software-comparison-top-8-platforms-reviewed16

tability.io/odt/articles/best-okr-software16

guideflow.com/blog/okr-software14

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Quantive

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

Gtmhub 5Quantive (formerly Gtmhub) 5Quantive (Gtmhub) 2Quantive/Gtmhub 2Gtmhub/Quantive 1Quantive / Gtmhub / Koan 1

Follow Quantive

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

where Quantive 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 Quantive, 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 quantive.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.