Every category where a model named Tableau 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
People analytics	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	97 of 99	55%	11	criticized challenger
Workforce planning	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	75 of 87	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by ChartHop at 31%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Tableau 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 Tableau 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	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	2	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	2	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	2	3
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	2	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labelsNone

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained6 labelsNone

Negative10 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative29 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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 Technical Solution: Looker / Tableau + Data Warehouse” Qwen 3.7 Flash · People analytics · direct 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.

“basic BI templates (such as generic PowerBI or Tableau HR dashboards) ... lack automated data pipelines” Gemini 3.5 Flash · People analytics · negative prompt · soft negative

“Powerful visualization, customizable dashboards, works with any data source, steep learning curve” GLM 4.7 FlashX · People analytics · comparative prompt · soft negative

“pipe data from their ATS ... into Microsoft PowerBI or Tableau... Cons: High maintenance” Qwen 3.7 Flash · People analytics · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

“do not have the resources to configure BI tools like Tableau or Power BI” Gemini 3.5 Flash · People analytics · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Tableau, over the 29 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Tableau was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Visier25 of 2910Not among the top eight

Microsoft Power BI18 of 290Not among the top eight

ChartHop15 of 294Not among the top eight

Crunchr14 of 292Not among the top eight

One Model13 of 291Not among the top eight

Workday People Analytics13 of 290Not among the top eight

BambooHR12 of 295Not among the top eight

SAP SuccessFactors12 of 290Not among the top eight

Culture Amp11 of 290Not among the top eight

Lattice9 of 291Not 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 Tableau. 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 13 of the 29 answers that named Tableau and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

eletive.com10

hrbench.com10

thrivesparrow.com8

peoplemanagingpeople.com6

engagedly.com5

leapsome.com5

selectsoftwarereviews.com5

adp.com4

firsthr.app4

hr.university4

No domain is on file for Tableau, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

eletive.com/blog/people-analytics-tools10

hrbench.com/blog/best-people-analytics-software10

thrivesparrow.com/blog/best-people-analytics-software8

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-people-analytics-software6

engagedly.com/blog/best-hr-analytics-softwares5

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/analytics-tools5

adp.com/resources/articles-and-insights/articles/p/people-analytics-pitfalls.aspx4

hr.university/tools/hr-analytics-software4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Tableau

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

Tableau (People Analytics) 1Tableau / ThoughtSpot 1

Follow Tableau

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

where Tableau 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 Tableau, 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 the vendor's own domain 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.