Persefoni vs Workiva
Zero of twelve models named Persefoni first on the direct prompt; one named Workiva. Both were named by all twelve models and Persefoni carries 28 labels and Workiva 35, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in fourteen categories this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve 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 ESG and carbon reporting page.
By framing
PersefoniFirst choices, of twelve modelsWorkiva
Across every category in the September 2026 Edition, Persefoni and Workiva were named in the same answer fifty-three times, of the 75 answers naming Persefoni and the 375 naming Workiva. In those answers Workiva took the first choice eighteen times and Persefoni three.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | | |
Persefoni Workiva first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Persefoni on the left and Workiva on the right.The direct prompt
Workiva first, Persefoni not the choice
1 of 12 modelsPersefoni was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
1 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
10 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
Persefoni9%#4 of 13Workiva0%#13 of 13Workiva38%#1 of 12Persefoni4%#5 of 12What the models said about Persefoni
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“Enterprise-grade platforms (like *Workiva*, *IBM Envizi*, or *Persefoni*) are usually overkill” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · soft negative
“I'd choose Persefoni because it has a free single-user tier and is repeatedly positioned as the cheapest starting point” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice
“### 1. Persefoni Pro (Free) ... Start with Persefoni's free tier” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: Persefoni ... robust free tier” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Workiva
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“| Workiva | $50K–$150K+ (likely overkill) | Skip unless you need integrated financial + ESG reporting |” DeepSeek V4 Flash · scale prompt · hard negative
“Platforms like Workiva excel here because they allow you to import messy Excel sheets, clean the data within the software using "source codes," and publish to a final PDF, keeping an audit trail.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“If you're a mid-market B2B company and want one default pick: - Choose Workiva if ESG reporting is tightly connected to finance, board reporting, or audit/compliance.” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose Workiva if: You need to produce high-stakes regulatory filings (SEC/CSRD) and need rigorous control over who sees and edits data.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
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.