HR AI Index

Index › Products › Turing · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Turing

4Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

2 of 12Models named it

2Categories

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. Turing was named 3 times in Internal talent marketpl and 1 other category, where Fuel50 led with 26%. 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-market40 of 128

under the label threshold

Enterprise43 of 82

under the label threshold

In internal talent marketpl · 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 Turing 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
Internal talent marketplace	Performance and talent management	0%	40 of 128	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Fuel50 at 26%
Skills intelligence	Performance and talent management	0%	110 of 161	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by TalentGuard at 19%

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
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	2	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1

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-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.

“Scaling remote teams: Turing” MiniMax M2.5 · Internal talent marketpl · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Turing, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Turing was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Arc.dev3 of 40Not among the top eight

Toptal3 of 40Not among the top eight

Upwork3 of 40Not among the top eight

Fiverr2 of 40Not among the top eight

Gloat1 of 41Not among the top eight

A.Team1 of 40Not among the top eight

Andela1 of 40Not among the top eight

Beamery1 of 40Not among the top eight

Contra1 of 40Not among the top eight

Eightfold AI1 of 40Not 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 Turing. 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 4 of the 4 answers that named Turing and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

upwork.com3

gartner.com2

index.dev2

memvers.com2

neobp.com2

recruiterslineup.com2

scale.jobs2

a.team1

ayautomate.com1

beon.tech1

Eighteen of the eighteen domain citations in answers naming Turing came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

upwork.com/resources/upwork-vs-toptal3

gartner.com/reviews/market/internal-talent-marketplaces2

index.dev/blog/beyond-turing-com-10-platforms-for-hiring-top-performing-remote-developers2

memvers.com/blog/fiverr-vs-upwork-vs-toptal-comparison-20262

neobp.com/side-hustle/upwork-vs-toptal-vs-fiverr-comparison-20262

recruiterslineup.com/best-talent-marketplace-platforms-reviewed2

scale.jobs/blog/freelance-platforms-b2b-services-comparison2

a.team/talent/guides1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Turing

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

where Turing 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 Turing, 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 turingcerts.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.