Every category where a model named Planable 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
Social media management	Marketing	2%	9 of 59	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by Sprout Social at 37%
Content marketing platforms	Marketing	0%	39 of 159	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by HubSpot Content Hub at 30%
Search and social advertising platforms	Marketing	0%	98 of 137	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Google Ads at 10%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Planable 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 Planable across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct2 labels1

Paraphrase9 labels1

Comparative7 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained7 labelsNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative1 label1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative30 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 4 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.

“For most mid-sized B2B companies without enterprise budgets, Planable or a LinkedIn-focused tool like DemandBird would offer the best balance” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Social media · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“If team collaboration is your priority, Planable ($33/mo) ... offer more affordable team-based workflows.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Social media · budget prompt · alternative

“combined with a plugin like CoSchedule or Planable (for the calendar and social publishing layer)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Content marketing · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Planable is the better fit for teams that are content-heavy and need structured review cycles.” Perplexity Sonar · Content marketing · paraphrase 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 Planable, over the 30 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Planable was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Sprout Social18 of 303Not in the top three

Buffer16 of 305Not in the top three

Hootsuite15 of 301Not in the top three

Agorapulse10 of 303Not in the top three

CoSchedule9 of 304Not in the top three

Zoho Social7 of 301Not in the top three

Vista Social6 of 304Not in the top three

SocialPilot6 of 302Not in the top three

Later6 of 301Not in the top three

Notion6 of 301Not 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 Planable. 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 4 of the 30 answers that named Planable and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

planable.ioYour site4

11outof11.com2

blog.hootsuite.com2

blog.hubspot.com2

buffer.com2

gitnux.org2

leapshq.com2

metaflow.life2

niftypm.com2

omnibound.ai2

Eighteen of the twenty-two domain citations in answers naming Planable came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

11outof11.com/blog/the-best-resources-for-content-planning2

blog.hootsuite.com/content-calendar-tools2

blog.hubspot.com/marketing/content-marketing-tools2

blog.hubspot.com/marketing/content-planning-software2

buffer.com/resources/best-social-media-management-tools2

gitnux.org/best/b2b-content-marketing-software2

leapshq.com/blog/content-marketing-tools2

metaflow.life/blog/best-content-calendar-tools2

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 Planable'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 Planable, 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 planable.io 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.