Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › SeekOut · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

SeekOut

17Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

9 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

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SeekOut was named 8 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 business28 of 150

under the label threshold

Mid-market23 of 127

under the label threshold

Enterprise53 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 SeekOut 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%	23 of 127	0%	8	under 10 labels · led by Precoro at 17%

Movement

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

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

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

Comparative15 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative17 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.

“Technical/engineering hiring | SeekOut | Deep technical profiles + diversity analytics” Kimi K2 · Strategic sourcing · comparative prompt · alternative

“SeekOut - Best for diversity, tech, and deep-profile searches.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Strategic sourcing · comparative prompt · alternative

“Deep technical or diversity hiring → SeekOut” 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SeekOut, over the 17 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SeekOut was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Gem16 of 174Not in the top three

HireEZ13 of 171Not in the top three

Juicebox12 of 172Not in the top three

Manatal10 of 172Not in the top three

LinkedIn Recruiter10 of 171Not in the top three

Loxo8 of 171Not in the top three

Findem7 of 170Not in the top three

ContactOut6 of 170Not in the top three

Eightfold AI5 of 170Not in the top three

Fetcher5 of 170Not 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 SeekOut. 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 17 of the 17 answers that named SeekOut and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

selectsoftwarereviews.com15

leonar.app11

juicebox.ai10

firsthr.app8

dishertalent.com7

metaview.ai7

pin.com7

sourcingtools.org7

matchr.io6

seekout.comYour site6

Seventy-eight of the eighty-four domain citations in answers naming SeekOut came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/best-candidate-sourcing-tools15

leonar.app/blog/best-talent-sourcing-platforms11

firsthr.app/compare/hiring/sourcing-tools8

dishertalent.com/blog/sourcing-tools-review7

juicebox.ai/blog/best-sourcing-tools-for-recruiters7

matchr.io/blog/top-40-best-sourcing-tools6

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

metaview.ai/resources/blog/sourcing-tools-for-recruiters5

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 SeekOut'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 SeekOut, 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 seekout.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.