2 categories · Named, not rankedWagestream
Standing by category
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earned wage access | Compensation and total rewards | 0% | 17 of 59 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Tapcheck at 29% |
| Flexible benefits and lifestyle spending accounts | Compensation and total rewards | 0% | 57 of 76 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Compt at 30% |
Movement
By model
How each model treated Wagestream across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
By framing
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“for UK or Indian markets, Wagestream, Hastee, and Refyne respectively are the go\u2011to players” MiniMax M2.5 · Earned wage access · 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.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Wagestream, over the 12 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Wagestream was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
What carried it into the answer
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 11 of the 12 answers that named Wagestream and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
Eighty-one of the eighty-one domain citations in answers naming Wagestream came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Names read as Wagestream
Follow Wagestream
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
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 Wagestream'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 Wagestream, 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 Wagestream by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Wagestream 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 Wagestream, 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 wagestream.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.