Every category where a model named NiceJob 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
Review and reputation management	Marketing	2%	9 of 103	0%	21	accepted challenger
Loyalty, advocacy and referrals	Marketing	0%	115 of 124	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Smile.io at 24%
Retail, proximity and IoT marketing	Marketing	0%	97 of 131	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Radar at 19%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for NiceJob yet. The next is due October 1, 2026. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated NiceJob across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	1	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	1	1	0	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	0	0	0	2
Mistral Small	0	1	2	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	2	0	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	1	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	1	0	2
Kimi K2	1	1	0	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	0	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	2	0	3

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

Direct5 labels2

Paraphrase13 labels4

Comparative25 labels10not counted in share

Budget-constrained10 labels2

Scale-constrained5 labels2

Negative15 labels5not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative73 labels in all, every segment counted; 10 of the 25 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.

“or NiceJob if you want a simple, proven budget-friendly platform for review collection” Perplexity Sonar · Reviews · budget prompt · first choice

“$75/month, no contract, no onboarding fees, month-to-month” Kimi K2 · Reviews · negative prompt · first choice

“Choose based on size (small: NiceJob; enterprise: Birdeye)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Reviews · comparative prompt · first choice

“e.g., NiceJob at $75/mo praised for SMBs” Grok 4.1 Fast · Reviews · negative 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.

“A bit pricey for small businesses (NiceJob) ... Lack of advanced features compared to more established platforms (NiceJob)” Llama 4 Maverick · Loyalty · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as NiceJob, over the 73 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and NiceJob was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Birdeye56 of 7314Not in the top three

Podium53 of 731Not in the top three

BrightLocal29 of 731Not in the top three

Reputation28 of 732Not in the top three

ReviewGrower20 of 734Not in the top three

GatherUp20 of 731Not in the top three

ReviewTrackers19 of 730Not in the top three

Trustpilot19 of 730Not in the top three

Reviewflowz17 of 733Not in the top three

Yotpo13 of 730Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 NiceJob. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

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 73 answers that named NiceJob and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

usa.inquirer.net10

appfollow.io8

learn.g2.com8

guideflow.com6

thecmo.com6

almcorp.com5

birdeye.com5

embedsocial.com5

wiserreview.com5

zapier.com5

Sixty-three of the sixty-three domain citations in answers naming NiceJob came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

usa.inquirer.net/191823/best-reputation-management-software10

appfollow.io/blog/reputation-management-software8

learn.g2.com/best-review-management-software7

thecmo.com/tools/best-reputation-management-software6

almcorp.com/blog/top-reputation-management-tools5

learn.g2.com/best-online-reputation-management-tools5

wiserreview.com/blog/online-reputation-management-software5

zapier.com/blog/review-management-software5

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 NiceJob'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 NiceJob, 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 nicejob.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.