AI Indexes
Finance AI Index
Index › Equity and corporate › Board portals › Boardable vs BoardEffect
Board portals · October 2026 Edition

Boardable vs BoardEffect

Zero of fourteen models named Boardable first on the direct prompt; zero named BoardEffect. Boardable was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and BoardEffect by thirteen and Boardable carries 33 labels and BoardEffect 20, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Boardable

accepted challenger

Named in three categories this edition.

BoardEffect

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

First-choice share20%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate3%10%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#6A position in a field of 10; printed, not drawn.
Labels3320A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Boardable reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.OnBoard was named alongside these two in fourteen of the fourteen direct answers. OnBoard vs Boardable · OnBoard vs BoardEffect · Boardable vs BoardPro

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the board portals page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
BoardableFirst choices, of fourteen modelsBoardEffect
Direct00
Paraphrase111 against Boardable · 2 against BoardEffect
Comparative00
Budget-constrained90
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Boardable and BoardEffect were named in the same answer fifty-five times, of the 207 answers naming Boardable and the 104 naming BoardEffect. In those answers BoardEffect took the first choice zero times and Boardable twelve.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Boardable and BoardEffect stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Boardable BoardEffect first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Boardable on the left and BoardEffect on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Boardable and BoardEffect stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
GPT-5.4 miniOnBoard alternatives: BoardPro, Boardable, Diligent Boards
Perplexity SonarOnBoard alternatives: BoardEffect, Boardable, Govenda
Grok 4.1 FastOnBoard alternatives: BoardEffect, Govenda
Mistral SmallOnBoard alternatives: BoardEffect, BoardPro, Govenda
Muse Glimmer 30BOnBoard alternatives: Aprio Board Portal, BoardEffect, Govenda

Neither was named

9 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5OnBoard alternatives: Azeus Convene, Diligent Boards
Gemini 3.5 FlashOnBoard alternatives: Aprio Board Portal, Board Intelligence, Nasdaq Boardvantage
DeepSeek V4 FlashOnBoard alternatives: BoardPro, Diligent Boards, Govenda
Llama 4 MaverickOnBoard
Qwen 3.7 FlashAprio Board Portal alternatives: AppDeck, OnBoard
Kimi K2Govenda, OnBoard alternatives: Aprio Board Portal
GLM 4.7 FlashXOnBoard alternatives: BoardPro
MiniMax M2.5Aprio Board Portal, OnBoard
GPT-6 LunaOnBoard alternatives: Aprio Board Portal

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Boardable leads by twenty-eight points.
Boardable30%#2 of 8
BoardEffect2%#6 of 8
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Boardable leads by eighteen points.
Boardable20%#2 of 10
BoardEffect2%#6 of 10
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: BoardEffect leads at enterprise.
BoardEffect2%#6 of 10
Boardable0%#10 of 10
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Boardable

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.

“Cost-effective, but may lack depth for complex B2B boards.” Grok 4.1 Fast · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“If you need per-user pricing and are a nonprofit / community board, Boardable is the most frequently recommended low-cost option.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about BoardEffect

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.

“Only consider BoardEffect if your use case is more nonprofit-style or you want something simpler.” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“1. BoardEffect (now part of the Passageways family alongside OnBoard) - targets nonprofits and mid-sized organizations.” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“BoardEffect is ideal for nonprofits and mid-sized organizations, offering a balance of features and ease of use.” Mistral Small · comparative prompt · alternative
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.