GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › TalentLMS · September 2026 Edition

3 categories · Ranked

TalentLMS

128Judge labels

42First choices

7Negative labels

12 of 12Models named it

3Categories

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

49% in Customer education for small business buyers

Rank 1 of 81 in the mid-market standingendorsed leader

0 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 47 labels there were negative.

By buyer segmentA small-business product: leader at small business, not named at enterprise.

Small business1 of 79

under the label threshold

In customer education · 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 TalentLMS 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
Customer education and LMS	Customer	33%	1 of 81	0%	47	endorsed leader
Sales coaching and training	Sales	0%	36 of 124	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by SalesHood at 27%
Digital adoption and onboarding	Customer	0%	53 of 58	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Userpilot at 29%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for TalentLMS 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 TalentLMS 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	0	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	1	2	1	4
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	3	0	4
Perplexity Sonar	1	1	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	2	1	5
Mistral Small	2	2	0	4
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	3	2	6
Llama 4 Maverick	2	0	2	4
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	5	1	6
Kimi K2	3	2	2	7
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	3	0	4
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	2	4

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

Direct21 labels5

Paraphrase25 labels11

Comparative30 labels8not counted in share

Budget-constrained31 labels21

Scale-constrained11 labels5

Negative10 labels4not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative128 labels in all, every segment counted; 42 of the 54 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.

“Safer Alternatives to Consider | TalentLMS | Transparent pricing (starts at $119/month), free plan available, quick deployment” Kimi K2 · Customer education · negative prompt · first choice

“If you want a formal "Academy" feel ... without enterprise-level prices, TalentLMS is the industry standard.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Customer education · budget prompt · first choice

“The best customer education platform for a company with a limited budget is TalentLMS, which offers a free plan” Llama 4 Maverick · Customer education · budget prompt · first choice

“TalentLMS stands out as the best customer education platform for companies with a limited budget.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Customer education · 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 TalentLMS, over the 128 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and TalentLMS was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Skilljar75 of 12816Compare →

LearnWorlds75 of 1288Not in the top three

Docebo68 of 1281Not in the top three

LearnUpon59 of 1288Compare →

Thought Industries43 of 1281Not in the top three

Thinkific40 of 1285Not in the top three

Absorb LMS35 of 1282Not in the top three

WorkRamp34 of 1281Not in the top three

Teachfloor23 of 1280Not in the top three

Intellum20 of 1282Not 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 TalentLMS. 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 19 of the 128 answers that named TalentLMS and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

guideflow.com7

minicoursegenerator.com7

proprofstraining.com7

easywebinar.com6

g2.com6

knowlify.com6

learnworlds.com6

continu.com5

dupple.com5

meltingspot.io5

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

Pages cited

minicoursegenerator.com/blog/best-customer-education-platforms7

easywebinar.com/blog/customer-education-platform6

guideflow.com/blog/customer-training-software6

dupple.com/learn/best-customer-education-platforms5

knowlify.com/articles/best-customer-training-software5

proprofstraining.com/blog/lms-for-customer-training5

teachfloor.com/blog/best-customer-education-platforms5

toolradar.com/guides/best-customer-education-platforms5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as TalentLMS

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

TalentlMS 1Teachfloor/TalentLMS 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 TalentLMS'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 TalentLMS, 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 talentlms.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.