Small business▼−6Since September 2026: 6% → 0%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 6% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 3 → 9 of 40
1 category · RankedEasyComp
22Judge labels
0First choices
2Negative labels
10 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in Commissions for small business buyers
Rank 16 of 47 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 5 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business10 of 44
0%15 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market16 of 47
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise34 of 34
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
In commissions · 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 EasyComp 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sales commissions and incentive compensation | Revenue operations | 0% | 16 of 47 | 0% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by CaptivateIQ at 25% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, EasyComp held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Commissions · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 14 → 15 of 46
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 24 → 30 of 31
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commissions | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 14 → 16 of 47 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated EasyComp across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated EasyComp across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| 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 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 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
Direct2 labelsNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative5 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained9 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative4 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative22 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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 EasyComp if you need a middle ground between raw cost and ease of use” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Commissions · budget prompt · alternative
“EasyComp ranks as the strongest overall option for B2B SaaS organizations” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Commissions · direct prompt · alternative
“3. EasyComp” Llama 4 Maverick · Commissions · budget 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 EasyComp, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and EasyComp was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as EasyComp, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and EasyComp was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 EasyComp. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 22 of the 22 answers that named EasyComp and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
qobra.co20
everstage.com13
guideflow.com13
learn.g2.com13
croclub.com10
g2.com10
captivateiq.com9
visdum.com7
quotapath.com6
firsthr.app5
106 of the 106 domain citations in answers naming EasyComp came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
easycomp.ai is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, EasyComp takes 0% of first choices and CaptivateIQ takes 25%.ShowHide
Search and answers
easycomp.ai is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, EasyComp takes 0% of first choices and CaptivateIQ takes 25%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “sales commission management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “best sales commission management platform”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 170 a month (“easycomp”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 4 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 102 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 32 · 1 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 36
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 16 of 47 in commissions
Segment leader
25%
CaptivateIQ
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 22 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 22 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on easycomp.ai
120
subdomains included
Content
106
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 87 | 16 | 2026-09-28 | ||
| Comparison | 14 | 1 | 2026-09-03 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 3 | 0 | 2026-02-08 | ||
| Case study | 1 | 0 | 2026-05-21 | ||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-288 sales compensation strategies to boost team performance blog
- 2026-09-28Sales compensation terminology a complete guide blog
- 2026-09-15How to build b2b sales compensation plan blog
- 2026-09-15Revenue plan quota plan commission budget blog
- 2026-09-03Excel vs vibe coding vs sales compensation software comparison
- 2026-09-03Sales compensation roi hidden cost blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page easycomp.ai exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read September 29, 2026.
Follow EasyComp
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.
The company
EasyComp is its own company.ShowHide
The company
EasyComp is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Sales compensation software with clear commission payments, fast implementation, and easy plan administration—without spreadsheets.
- For
- Finance, RevOps, and Sales teams; sales organizations, revenue operations teams, finance teams, and compensation administrators at growing and enterprise companies
- Price stated
- Starter plan $30 per user / month; Growth plan $45 per user / month; Enterprise plan Talk to sales easycomp.ai
- Starting price
- 30 easycomp.ai
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type II
- Customers named
- AlkiraFieldguideCarrum Health
- Not stated on the pages read
- Free plan or trial, integrations, hosting
What EasyComp's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: easycomp.ai, trust.easycomp.ai. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 EasyComp'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 EasyComp, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for EasyComp by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where EasyComp 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 EasyComp, 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.