Every category where a model named LinkedIn Recruiter 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%	22 of 127	17%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative14 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative8 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative22 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 2 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.

“Use LinkedIn-native tools (Recruiter Lite, Sales Navigator) that work within platform terms” Kimi K2 · Strategic sourcing · negative prompt · first choice

“Most teams' starting point → LinkedIn Recruiter (essential, but limited to LinkedIn)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Strategic sourcing · comparative prompt · first choice

“LinkedIn-first strategy | LinkedIn Recruiter | Native access to 1B+ professionals” Kimi K2 · 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.

“Be wary of high-cost platforms like LinkedIn Recruiter ($10k+/seat for enterprise)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Strategic sourcing · negative prompt · soft negative

“LinkedIn Recruiter — cost & data accuracy ... Expensive with no public pricing” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Strategic sourcing · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LinkedIn Recruiter, over the 21 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LinkedIn Recruiter was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

HireEZ15 of 211Not in the top three

Gem13 of 213Not in the top three

Juicebox11 of 210Not in the top three

SeekOut10 of 210Not in the top three

Loxo9 of 210Not in the top three

Fetcher8 of 210Not in the top three

Manatal8 of 210Not in the top three

Pin6 of 211Not in the top three

Coupa6 of 210Not in the top three

Findem6 of 210Not 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 LinkedIn Recruiter. 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 19 of the 21 answers that named LinkedIn Recruiter and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

selectsoftwarereviews.com13

firsthr.app9

hiretruffle.com8

metaview.ai8

juicebox.ai7

leonar.app7

pin.com7

sourcingtools.org7

sitepoint.com6

linkedin.com5

Seventy-seven of the seventy-seven domain citations in answers naming LinkedIn Recruiter came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/best-candidate-sourcing-tools13

firsthr.app/compare/hiring/sourcing-tools9

hiretruffle.com/blog/sourcing-tools-for-recruiters7

leonar.app/blog/best-talent-sourcing-platforms7

metaview.ai/resources/blog/sourcing-tools-for-recruiters7

juicebox.ai/blog/best-sourcing-tools-for-recruiters6

sitepoint.com/best-sourcing-tools-for-recruiters6

matchr.io/blog/top-40-best-sourcing-tools5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as LinkedIn Recruiter

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

LinkedIn Recruiter Lite 1Recruiter Lite 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 LinkedIn Recruiter'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 LinkedIn Recruiter, 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 linkedinrecruiter.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.