Every category where a model named Diligent Boards 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	0%	27 of 97	28%	18	criticized challenger
Entity management	Equity and corporate	0%	80 of 87	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Athennian at 18%

Movement

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

Direct17 labels4

Paraphrase3 labels1

Comparative26 labels8not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labels2

Scale-constrained7 labels1

Negative10 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative69 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 of the 17 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.

“Market leader for enterprises; used by 700K+ leaders. High ratings (4.7/5 on Capterra).” Grok 4.1 Fast · Board · comparative prompt · first choice

“Best for large enterprise governance: Diligent Boards or Nasdaq Boardvantage.” GPT-5.4 mini · Board · comparative prompt · first choice

“Used by 70% of Russell 3000 boards” Kimi K2 · Board · comparative prompt · first choice

“with Diligent Boards as the safer choice if your board is more governance-heavy or regulated” GPT-5.4 mini · Board · direct 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.

“What to Avoid ... typically overkill (and overpriced) for mid-market B2B companies” MiniMax M2.5 · Board · direct prompt · hard negative

“Avoid: Enterprise solutions like Wolters Kluwer Legisway or Diligent Boardroom” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Entity management · budget prompt · hard negative

“Diligent Boards: Dated interface, slow performance (especially with large PDFs or mobile), difficult navigation, and lack of offline access” Grok 4.1 Fast · Board · negative prompt · soft negative

“Great for large, regulated organizations with strong admin support, but can feel clunky for smaller or more agile boards.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Board · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Diligent Boards, over the 69 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Diligent Boards was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Nasdaq Boardvantage50 of 698Not in the top three

OnBoard50 of 696Not in the top three

Azeus Convene25 of 690Not in the top three

Boardable24 of 694Not in the top three

BoardEffect24 of 690Not in the top three

BoardPro22 of 697Not in the top three

Board Intelligence19 of 690Not in the top three

AppDeck Board Portal18 of 694Not in the top three

Planful15 of 690Not in the top three

Workiva15 of 690Not 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 Diligent Boards. 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 63 of the 69 answers that named Diligent Boards and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

worldmetrics.org44

appdeck.com43

clearpointstrategy.com33

board-room.org30

g2.com26

boardintelligence.com25

getaleph.com22

capterra.com20

diligent.comYour site19

fast.io19

262 of the 281 domain citations in answers naming Diligent Boards came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

appdeck.com/blog/board-reporting-software-comparison36

clearpointstrategy.com/blog/board-reporting-software33

worldmetrics.org/best/board-reporting-software33

worldmetrics.org/best/board-report-software24

board-room.org/blog/board-reporting-software22

getaleph.com/answers/board-investor-reporting-software22

zipdo.co/best/board-reporting-software19

appdeck.com/blog/board-portal-software-comparison-202617

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Diligent Boards

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Diligent Boards; a claim can dispute any of them.

Diligent Boardroom 1Diligent Boards AI 1

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 Diligent Boards'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 Diligent Boards, 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 diligent.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.