Every category where a model named Diligent 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
Entity management	Equity and corporate	3%	16 of 87	64%	11	criticized challenger
Board and investor reporting	Planning and analysis	2%	20 of 97	71%	17	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Diligent 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 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	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	0	5	6
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	2	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	4	5
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	4	5
Kimi K2	0	0	0	2	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1	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

Direct6 labels1

Paraphrase9 labels4

Comparative7 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained19 labels2

Scale-constrained15 labelsNone

Negative18 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative74 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 10 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.

“Large public company: Diligent or Nasdaq Boardvantage (robust compliance, audit trails)” MiniMax M2.5 · Board · comparative prompt · first choice

“Diligent is widely considered the gold standard.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Board · direct prompt · first choice

“## Top Recommendation: Diligent” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Entity management · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Diligent is the titan of the industry. It is highly secure and customizable but can be very expensive and complex to implement.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Board · comparative 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.

“Diligent ($15K\u201330K+/yr) and Board Intelligence are enterprise standard but far out of budget. Skip these” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Board · budget prompt · hard negative

“I would avoid Diligent, BoardEffect, and Boardvantage if budget is the main constraint” Perplexity Sonar · Board · budget prompt · hard negative

“Legacy Systems (e.g., Diligent, CSC Entity Management): Often highly robust ... but can feel clunky, require heavy training, have longer implementation times, and carry higher price tags.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Entity management · scale prompt · soft negative

“Many legacy systems (like Diligent, Mitratech, or CSC) are designed for large multinationals, hide their pricing ... often start at tens of thousands of dollars per year.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Entity management · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Diligent, over the 74 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Diligent was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

OnBoard25 of 747Not in the top three

Nasdaq Boardvantage25 of 740Not in the top three

BoardPro22 of 748Not in the top three

Boardable21 of 744Not in the top three

BoardEffect15 of 740Not in the top three

AppDeck Board Portal14 of 743Not in the top three

Athennian14 of 743Not in the top three

EntityKeeper12 of 745Not in the top three

I'mBoard7 of 745Not in the top three

ContractZen7 of 743Not 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. 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 52 of the 74 answers that named Diligent and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

appdeck.com28

worldmetrics.org25

board-room.org20

clearpointstrategy.com19

capterra.com18

g2.com18

diligent.comYour site16

imboard.ai14

fast.io13

guideflow.com11

166 of the 182 domain citations in answers naming Diligent came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

appdeck.com/blog/board-reporting-software-comparison20

clearpointstrategy.com/blog/board-reporting-software19

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

board-room.org/blog/board-reporting-software15

guideflow.com/blog/board-management-software11

worldmetrics.org/best/board-reporting-software11

board-room.org/10

getaleph.com/answers/board-investor-reporting-software10

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Diligent

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

Diligent (Boardbooks) 1Diligent (Diligent One Platform) 1Diligent (OnPoint) 1Diligent (formerly Boardable) 1Diligent / Nasdaq Boardvantage 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'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, 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.