Every category where a model named Microsoft Bookings 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
Meeting scheduling	Sales	0%	13 of 58	6%	18	accepted challenger	=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, Microsoft Bookings held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.

Best category · Scheduling · by segment

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 14 of 50, unchanged

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 → 11 of 55

Enterprise▼−5Since September 2026: 11% → 6%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

6%from 11% in September 2026

Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 3 → 4 of 58

All categories · Mid-market

Category	September 2026	Now	Change	Reading	Rank
Scheduling	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 → 13 of 58

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 Microsoft Bookings 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	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.20	0	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	2	1	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	0	1	3
Kimi K2	0	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	2	0	0	2
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	1	1	0	2

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

Paraphrase12 labels2

Comparative27 labelsNone

Budget-constrained7 labels1

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative8 labels3not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative60 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 6 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.

“stick to the giants (Calendly, HubSpot, Microsoft Bookings)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Scheduling · negative prompt · first choice

“Free with many Office 365 plans, suitable for teams already in the Microsoft ecosystem.” Mistral Small · Scheduling · budget prompt · alternative

“Organizations using Microsoft 365 ... Availability depends on the Microsoft 365 plan.” GPT-6 Luna · Scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative

“Microsoft Bookings / Zoho if you want native integration with an existing suite” Muse Glimmer 30B · Scheduling · 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.

“(Low cost, but lack the sophisticated sales qualification features mentioned above)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Scheduling · scale prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Microsoft Bookings, over the 60 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Microsoft Bookings was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Calendly57 of 6036Not among the top eight

Chili Piper31 of 600Not among the top eight

Cal.com29 of 608Not among the top eight

HubSpot Meetings24 of 605Not among the top eight

Doodle20 of 600Not among the top eight

Google Calendar Appointment Scheduling17 of 600Not among the top eight

SavvyCal15 of 600Not among the top eight

Acuity Scheduling14 of 600Not among the top eight

YouCanBookMe14 of 600Not among the top eight

Zoho Bookings11 of 600Not 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 Microsoft Bookings. 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 53 of the 60 answers that named Microsoft Bookings and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

calendly.com35

cal.com29

zoho.com18

koalendar.com14

kumospace.com14

learn.microsoft.comYour site13

peoplemanagingpeople.com13

revenuehero.io13

youcanbook.me13

g2.com12

161 of the 174 domain citations in answers naming Microsoft Bookings came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

calendly.com/blog/scheduling-software-companies16

kumospace.com/blog/best-meeting-scheduler-tools13

zoho.com/bookings/explore/meeting-scheduling-tools.html13

revenuehero.io/blog/best-meeting-scheduling-software12

cal.com/blog/enterprise-scheduling-software11

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-meeting-scheduling-software11

youcanbook.me/blog/best-scheduling-apps10

calendly.com/blog/meeting-scheduling-software9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Microsoft Bookings stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 27,100 a month (“microsoft bookings”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 1,496 a month
Its own site: It sits on Microsoft's site (microsoft.com), so there are no site figures for it alone

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 13 of 58 in scheduling

Segment leader

36%

Calendly

First choices: 3 across its categories
Named in: 60 answers
Its own site cited: in 53 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.

Follow Microsoft Bookings

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

Microsoft is the company behind Microsoft Bookings.

ShowHide

On record

Wikidata

Website: microsoft.com
Headquarters: Vancouver, Canada
Founded: 1975
Employees: about 228,000 (2024)
Ownership: Public, 4338 on Hong Kong Stock Exchange
Also from Microsoft: Azure Synapse, Bing Webmaster Tools, Microsoft 365, Microsoft 365 Copilot, Microsoft Accessibility Insights, Microsoft Ads, Microsoft Advertising, Microsoft Advertising Editor and 49 more

Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · LinkedIn · Crunchbase

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Free plan or trial: Vyzkoušet zdarma microsoft.com/cs-cz/dynamics-365/pricing-overview
Customers named: ContentsquareServiceNowPangaea DataNeo4jSoftwareOnePresidio
Not stated on the pages read: Positioning, who it is for, price, starting price, integrations, certifications, hosting

What Microsoft Bookings's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: microsoft.com, microsoft.com/cs-cz/dynamics-365/pricing-overview, trust.microsoft.com, microsoft.com/cs-cz/dynamics-365/solutions/ai, microsoft.com/cs-cz/isv/marketplace. 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 Microsoft Bookings'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 Microsoft Bookings, 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 Microsoft Bookings by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Microsoft Bookings 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 Microsoft Bookings, 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.