Small business=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 75 → 64 of 74
LinkedIn · 1 category · Named, not rankedLinkedIn Groups
10Judge labels
1First choices
6Negative labels
6 / 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.
Standing
6 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. LinkedIn Groups was named 6 times in Community, where Bettermode led with 29%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business65 of 76
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market17 of 75
2%6 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise61 of 69
0%1 label
under the label threshold
In community · 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 LinkedIn Groups 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community platforms | Customer | 2% | 17 of 75 | 50% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by Bettermode at 29% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, LinkedIn Groups held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Community · by segment
Mid-market▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 52 → 16 of 67
EnterprisenewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 55 of 63, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 52 → 17 of 75 |
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 LinkedIn Groups 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 LinkedIn Groups 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 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labels1
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative4 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 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.
“start with Facebook Groups, LinkedIn Groups, or a self‑hosted Discourse/WordPress setup” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Community · budget 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.
“same caution as other public social networks; you have limited control over the audience, structure, and future platform rules” Perplexity Sonar · Community · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid LinkedIn Groups. They are "rented land" and lack analytics/ownership.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Community · direct prompt · hard negative
“LinkedIn Groups - Free/low-cost but limited customization” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Community · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LinkedIn Groups, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LinkedIn Groups was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LinkedIn Groups, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LinkedIn Groups 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 LinkedIn Groups. 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 7 of the 10 answers that named LinkedIn Groups and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
bettermode.com6
higherlogic.com5
thecmo.com5
guideflow.com4
us.fitgap.com4
aicostadvisory.com3
feverbee.com3
itechguides.com3
learnworlds.com3
standingongiants.com3
Thirty-nine of the thirty-nine domain citations in answers naming LinkedIn Groups came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Follow LinkedIn Groups
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
LinkedIn is the company behind LinkedIn Groups.ShowHide
The company
LinkedIn is the company behind LinkedIn Groups.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- linkedin.com
- Headquarters
- Sunnyvale, United States
- Founded
- 2002
- Also from LinkedIn
- LinkedIn Accelerate, LinkedIn Ads + Sales Navigator, LinkedIn Ads Manager, LinkedIn Advertising, LinkedIn Analytics, LinkedIn Audience Network, LinkedIn CTV Ads, LinkedIn Campaign Manager and 16 more
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata
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 LinkedIn Groups'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 LinkedIn Groups, 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 LinkedIn Groups by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where LinkedIn Groups 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 LinkedIn Groups, 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.