Every category where a model named Boardable 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
Board and investor reporting	Planning and analysis	14%	2 of 97	4%	25	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct8 labels1

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative22 labels4not counted in share

Budget-constrained22 labels12

Scale-constrained9 labels2

Negative8 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative70 labels in all, every segment counted; 15 of the 20 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.

“If you need a simple, affordable solution for a small board and are comfortable with manual setup: Boardable (Core) or Google Workspace.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Board · budget prompt · first choice

“For the most affordable and straightforward solution, Boardable is likely the best choice if your needs are basic.” Mistral Small · Board · budget prompt · first choice

“Boardable if you have a very small board (under 10 members) and want the lowest per-user cost” Kimi K2 · Board · budget prompt · first choice

“Boardable stands out as the most affordable dedicated board reporting and management software” Grok 4.1 Fast · Board · 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.

“Limited governance depth; fewer advanced features; overkill for larger or complex boards” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Board · direct prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Boardable, over the 70 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Boardable was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

OnBoard49 of 707Compare →

BoardPro36 of 7012Compare →

Nasdaq Boardvantage34 of 704Not in the top three

AppDeck Board Portal30 of 704Not in the top three

Diligent Boards24 of 706Not in the top three

BoardEffect24 of 700Not in the top three

Diligent21 of 702Not in the top three

Aprio Board Portal15 of 703Not in the top three

Azeus Convene15 of 700Not in the top three

Board Intelligence10 of 701Not 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 Boardable. 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 65 of the 70 answers that named Boardable and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

appdeck.com48

board-room.org43

worldmetrics.org35

clearpointstrategy.com34

g2.com33

capterra.com29

guideflow.com26

fast.io24

imboard.ai21

zipdo.co19

312 of the 312 domain citations in answers naming Boardable came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

appdeck.com/blog/board-reporting-software-comparison42

appdeck.com/blog/board-portal-software-comparison-202634

clearpointstrategy.com/blog/board-reporting-software34

board-room.org/blog/board-reporting-software33

guideflow.com/blog/board-management-software26

worldmetrics.org/best/board-reporting-software20

zipdo.co/best/board-reporting-software19

board-room.org/18

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 Boardable'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 Boardable, 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 board.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.