3 categories · RankedCaptivateIQ
Standing by category
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Territory and quota planning | Revenue operations | 30% | 1 of 103 | 9% | 44 | endorsed leader |
| Sales commissions and incentive compensation | Revenue operations | 24% | 2 of 51 | 18% | 57 | accepted challenger |
| Sales enablement and content | Sales | 0% | 40 of 81 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Dock at 19% |
Movement
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 3 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 9 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 9 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 4 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 11 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 4 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 11 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 2 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 10 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 6 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 |
| Kimi K2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 9 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 8 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 9 |
By framing
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“End-to-End Revenue Plan | CaptivateIQ, Forma.ai | Combines territory carving, quota setting, and variable comp in a single agile platform.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Territory planning · scale prompt · first choice
“Overall Top Pick for Most Mid-Market B2B: CaptivateIQ—largest user base, flexibility for growing complexity, strong analyst backing” Grok 4.1 Fast · Commissions · direct prompt · first choice
“CaptivateIQ is widely considered the strongest option for mid-market teams because it eliminates the need for multiple disconnected tools.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Territory planning · direct prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, CaptivateIQ offers the best balance of flexibility, ease of use, and enterprise capabilities.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Commissions · direct prompt · first choice
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 enterprise platforms like Xactly, SAP Commissions, CaptivateIQ” Perplexity Sonar · Commissions · budget prompt · hard negative
“What to Avoid - Enterprise platforms like CaptivateIQ (~$35K+/year)” Kimi K2 · Commissions · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise tools (e.g., CaptivateIQ, Spiff at $75/user/mo)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Commissions · budget prompt · hard negative
“Mid-market RevOps tools (~$20K+/year or $2,400+/user/year).” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Territory planning · budget prompt · hard negative
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 45 of the 256 answers that named CaptivateIQ and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
135 of the 167 domain citations in answers naming CaptivateIQ came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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 CaptivateIQ'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 CaptivateIQ, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
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 captivateiq.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.