Index › Products › Thrive · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Thrive

7Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

5 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Thrive was named 2 times in Learning experience plat, where Learn Amp led with 28%. 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-market52 of 79

under the label threshold

Enterprise36 of 61

under the label threshold

In learning experience plat · 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 Thrive 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
Learning experience platforms	Learning and development	0%	52 of 79	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by Learn Amp at 28%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Thrive 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 Thrive 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	1	1	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
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	0	0
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

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative7 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.

“Choose Thrive if you want an all-in-one LXP/LMS with strong social learning.” GPT-5.4 mini · Learning experience plat · 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.

“Avoid if budget is limited ... Premium LXPs like Thrive ... pricing that starts around $15,000, which is usually too high” GPT-5.4 mini · Learning experience plat · budget prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Thrive, over the 7 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Thrive was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

360Learning4 of 71Not among the top eight

Cornerstone OnDemand4 of 70Not among the top eight

Degreed4 of 70Not among the top eight

Docebo3 of 71Not among the top eight

Sana Learn2 of 70Not among the top eight

Practice1 of 71Not among the top eight

Adobe Learning Manager1 of 70Not among the top eight

BetterUp1 of 70Not among the top eight

CYPHER Learning1 of 70Not among the top eight

Clarity.fm1 of 70Not 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 Thrive. 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 5 of the 7 answers that named Thrive and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com2

sanalabs.com2

thrivelearning.com2

360learning.com1

beaconjournal.com1

capterra.com1

cypherlearning.com1

digitalstrategyinstitute.org1

docebo.com1

expertusone.com1

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

Pages cited

sanalabs.com/learn-blog/best-lxps-2025-roi-engagement-rankings2

360learning.com/blog/docebo-vs-360learning1

beaconjournal.com/press-release/story/235493/mexty-achieves-iso-iec-27001-certification-an1

capterra.com/learning-experience-platform-software1

capterra.com/resources/best-lms-corporate-training1

capterra.com/resources/best-lms-for-small-business1

cypherlearning.com/blog/business/best-lms-for-enterprise-companies-with-10000-employees1

digitalstrategyinstitute.org/post/best-lxp-learning-experience-platforms-in-the-world-20251

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Thrive

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

where Thrive 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 Thrive, 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.