| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contact center quality assurance | Customer | 14% | 3 of 81 | 4% | 28 | accepted challenger |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“If you are Zendesk-native: Zendesk QA, formerly Klaus ... Zendesk QA gives the deepest native integration and risk-based review without manual sampling.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Contact center QA · direct prompt · first choice
“A highly automated, AI-driven QA tool built specifically for support teams, now natively unified inside the Zendesk ecosystem.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Contact center QA · comparative prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend Zendesk QA (formerly Klaus) if your priority is support quality assurance and conversation review” Perplexity Sonar · Contact center QA · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“the best contact center quality assurance tool is usually Zendesk QA if you already use Zendesk” Perplexity Sonar · Contact center QA · budget prompt · first choice
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.
“Tools that rely heavily on AI scoring (e.g., Observe.AI, Kaizo, Zendesk QA/Formerly Klaus)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Contact center QA · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 84 of the 84 answers that named Zendesk QA and are not a share of its labels.
372 of the 403 domain citations in answers naming Zendesk QA came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · Crunchbase
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 Zendesk QA'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 Zendesk QA, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Zendesk QA by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
Zendesk QA is among the products AI models recommend first in Contact center quality assurance this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.