Every category where a model named Performio 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
Sales commissions and incentive compensation	Revenue operations	4%	7 of 51	6%	36	accepted challenger
Territory and quota planning	Revenue operations	0%	33 of 103	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by CaptivateIQ at 30%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Performio 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 Performio 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	3	0	0	3
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	2	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	3	1	0	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	2	1	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	4	1	0	5
Mistral Small	0	2	1	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	1	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	4	0	4
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	1	1	2
Kimi K2	0	0	2	1	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	4	0	0	4
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	1	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

Direct19 labelsNone

Paraphrase14 labels2

Comparative20 labelsNone

Budget-constrained8 labels3

Scale-constrained10 labels2

Negative6 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative77 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 7 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.

“I'd recommend CaptivateIQ or Performio as the top choices” MiniMax M2.5 · Commissions · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Shortlist CaptivateIQ, Performio, and Everstage” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Commissions · scale prompt · first choice

“If you have more complex commission structures, Performio or CaptivateIQ might be worth the higher investment.” MiniMax M2.5 · Commissions · direct prompt · alternative

“Performio is designed for mid-market organizations that need to move beyond spreadsheets” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Commissions · direct 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.

“What to Avoid on a Budget - Visdum, CaptivateIQ, Performio” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Commissions · budget prompt · hard negative

“Low-Moderate Caution... "No real what-if forecasting"” Kimi K2 · Commissions · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Performio, over the 77 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Performio was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CaptivateIQ72 of 7720Not in the top three

Everstage58 of 7713Not in the top three

Salesforce Spiff57 of 772Not in the top three

QuotaPath44 of 777Not in the top three

Qobra40 of 776Not in the top three

Varicent37 of 776Not in the top three

Xactly32 of 776Not in the top three

Xactly Incent26 of 774Not in the top three

Visdum20 of 770Not in the top three

SAP Commissions13 of 770Not 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 Performio. 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 15 of the 77 answers that named Performio and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

qobra.co13

everstage.com12

guideflow.com10

captivateiq.com8

learn.g2.com7

technologyadvice.com7

visdum.com7

forma.ai6

getcentify.com6

quotapath.com6

Eighty-two of the eighty-two domain citations in answers naming Performio came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

qobra.co/blog/top-sales-commission-tools10

everstage.com/10-best-sales-commission-software9

learn.g2.com/best-sales-compensation-software7

quotapath.com/blog/best-sales-compensation-software6

forma.ai/resources/article/incentive-compensation-management-software5

getcentify.com/best-sales-commission-software5

guideflow.com/blog/sales-commission-software5

captivateiq.com/4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Performio

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Performio; a claim can dispute any of them.

Performio/Xactly 1

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 Performio'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 Performio, 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 performio.co 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.