Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › Eightfold AI · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Eightfold AI

8Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Eightfold AI was named 5 times in Strategic sourcing, where Precoro led with 17%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market51 of 127

under the label threshold

Enterprise51 of 61

under the label threshold

In strategic sourcing · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Eightfold AI 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
Strategic sourcing	Spend and procurement	0%	51 of 127	20%	5	under 10 labels · led by Precoro at 17%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Eightfold AI 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 Eightfold AI across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	0	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Enterprise workforce planning / internal mobility → Eightfold or Findem” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Strategic sourcing · 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.

“Facing a class-action lawsuit (filed January 2026) alleging secret scraping” Kimi K2 · Strategic sourcing · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Eightfold AI, over the 8 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Eightfold AI was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Gem6 of 81Not in the top three

LinkedIn Recruiter5 of 82Not in the top three

HireEZ5 of 80Not in the top three

SeekOut5 of 80Not in the top three

AmazingHiring3 of 80Not in the top three

Beamery3 of 80Not in the top three

Coupa3 of 80Not in the top three

Findem3 of 80Not in the top three

Jaggaer3 of 80Not in the top three

Juicebox3 of 80Not 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 Eightfold AI. 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 7 of the 8 answers that named Eightfold AI and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

pin.com6

selectsoftwarereviews.com5

sourcingtools.org5

leonar.app4

metaview.ai4

sitepoint.com4

juicebox.ai3

firsthr.app2

fountain.com2

g2.com2

Thirty-seven of the thirty-seven domain citations in answers naming Eightfold AI came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

pin.com/blog/candidate-sourcing-software5

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/best-candidate-sourcing-tools5

leonar.app/blog/best-talent-sourcing-platforms4

sitepoint.com/best-sourcing-tools-for-recruiters4

juicebox.ai/blog/best-sourcing-tools-for-recruiters3

metaview.ai/resources/blog/sourcing-tools-for-recruiters3

firsthr.app/compare/hiring/sourcing-tools2

metaview.ai/resources/blog/candidate-sourcing-tools2

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 Eightfold AI'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 Eightfold AI, 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 eightfold.ai 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.