GTM AI Index
Index Vendors › SC Training · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Ranked

SC Training

6Judge labels
4First choices
0Negative labels
5 of 12Models named it
1Category
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
6% in Sales coaching for mid-market buyers
Rank 5 of 124 in the mid-market standing
0 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 3 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In sales coaching · 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 SC Training 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Sales coaching and trainingSales6%5 of 1240%3under 10 labels · led by SalesHood at 27%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SC Training 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 SC Training across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash10001
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast10001
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash00000
Llama 4 Maverick00000
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K210001
GLM 4.7 FlashX00000
MiniMax M2.500000

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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained6 labels4
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative6 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 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.

“the best sales coaching and training platform is SC Training (formerly EdApp), especially its free plan supporting up to 10 users” Grok 4.1 Fast · Sales coaching · budget prompt · first choice
“SC Training (formerly EdApp) — *Best Free-Forever LMS* ... free forever for up to 10 users” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Sales coaching · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with SC Training's free plan if you need a platform to deliver and track training” Kimi K2 · Sales coaching · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SC Training, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SC Training was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Fathom3 of 61Not in the top three
Gong3 of 60Not in the top three
HubSpot Academy3 of 60Not in the top three
Avoma2 of 61Not in the top three
TalentLMS2 of 61Not in the top three
360Learning2 of 60Not in the top three
HubSpot Sales Hub2 of 60Not in the top three
MindTickle2 of 60Not in the top three
360Learning Team Plan1 of 60Not in the top three
7taps1 of 60Not 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 SC Training. 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 1 of the 6 answers that named SC Training and are not a share of its labels.

Names read as SC Training

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SC Training; a claim can dispute any of them.
SC Training (formerly EdApp) 3
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 SC Training'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 SC Training, 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 the vendor's own domain 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.

Subscribe to the pack