Every category where a model named Xactly Incent 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	0%	13 of 51	35%	17	criticized challenger

Movement

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

Direct6 labels3

Paraphrase4 labels1

Comparative13 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labels2

Scale-constrained7 labels1

Negative8 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative44 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 9 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.

“Choose Xactly or CaptivateIQ if you are a large enterprise with >500 reps” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Commissions · comparative prompt · first choice

“best for large enterprises needing mature ICM, compliance, and a broader SPM suite” GPT-5.4 mini · Commissions · comparative prompt · alternative

“Enterprise-scale incentive compensation with benchmarking and broad SPM capabilities.” Perplexity Sonar · Commissions · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for: Large global enterprises with complex, audit-heavy compensation programs” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Commissions · comparative 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.

“Avoid enterprise-tier platforms like Oracle SPM, Xactly Incent, Varicent, and Anaplan” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Commissions · negative prompt · hard negative

“What to Avoid ... Xactly Incent, or Varicent” Kimi K2 · Commissions · budget prompt · hard negative

“Lengthy rollouts (3-6+ months), dated/clunky UI, slow loading/data refreshes, not intuitive navigation” Grok 4.1 Fast · Commissions · negative prompt · soft negative

“more of an enterprise option, and Xactly's pricing is quote-based rather than openly cheap” GPT-5.4 mini · Commissions · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Xactly Incent, over the 44 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Xactly Incent was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CaptivateIQ40 of 447Not in the top three

Salesforce Spiff32 of 441Not in the top three

Everstage28 of 445Not in the top three

Performio26 of 442Not in the top three

Varicent23 of 443Not in the top three

QuotaPath19 of 447Not in the top three

Qobra19 of 441Not in the top three

Visdum13 of 441Not in the top three

SAP Commissions11 of 440Not in the top three

Commissionly8 of 442Not 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 Xactly Incent. 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 12 of the 44 answers that named Xactly Incent and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

captivateiq.com9

everstage.com8

guideflow.com8

qobra.co8

learn.g2.com6

quotapath.com6

forma.ai5

getcentify.com5

technologyadvice.com4

visdum.com4

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

Pages cited

qobra.co/blog/top-sales-commission-tools7

captivateiq.com/6

everstage.com/10-best-sales-commission-software6

learn.g2.com/best-sales-compensation-software6

captivateiq.com/blog/best-sales-compensation-software5

getcentify.com/best-sales-commission-software5

guideflow.com/blog/sales-commission-software5

quotapath.com/blog/best-sales-compensation-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 Xactly Incent'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 Xactly Incent, 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 xactly.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.