Skip to content

Study 7: The AI Written RFP

Broadcastwell Research, Study 7. CC BY 4.0. DOI 10.5281/zenodo.23271935. All versions.

Download the complete report as a PDF. Browse the Criteria Maps or download every data table.

Prepared by the Broadcastwell team

Team review: in progress. No criterion has completed the two analyst verification process.

The research in figures

Across fourteen categories we identify 2,003 distinct category criteria from 2,093 eligible source answers after the recorded study exclusions. The evidence contains 10,547 exact supporting answer spans, 2,417 explicit vendor association passages and 10,015 dated page comparisons across seventy mapped vendor pages.

The tables show the ten most frequently stated criteria in each category, ordered by distinct answer count and then criterion label. The full data includes every criterion and supporting record. Criteria are category specific; similarly worded criteria in different categories are not combined. Every criterion remains Team review: in progress.

Source and scope

Answers captured under method v1.1 on 22 to 23 Sep 2026 for the Absence Index release 2026-09 (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22907695).

We examine the buying requirements stated before the first vendor in each eligible category answer from ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode. Each engine and question had three scheduled runs. We use the frozen September answers rather than a new model capture.

A criterion count is the number of distinct eligible answers that state that criterion in the eligible prefix. Multiple supporting passages in one answer count once. Its base is the eligible answer count for that category after the documented study exclusions. The reported interval is the Wilson 95 percent interval computed from that count and base. Repeated answers share prompts and conditions; these descriptive calculations are not guarantees about future answers or an independent sample of all buyers.

The repeat count shows how many of the three scheduled runs state a criterion for the named engine and question. It describes repetition in those captures. It is not a probability that a claim is correct.

Named vendors and dated pages

A vendor association requires an eligible prefix criterion and an explicit connection to that vendor in the same complete answer. A cited publisher, generic list, anonymous product, negative comparison or unsupported implication does not establish the association. Separate passages and repeated runs are counted under the published rules.

For each category we map the five vendors with the highest mention counts in the frozen Index release, breaking equal counts by name. The page comparisons refer only to the exact dated page identified in the data. A feature or requirement not stated on that page is not evidence that the product lacks it. A partial compound statement, unsuitable product scope, missing plan detail or unread page remains unknown.

We preserve the distinction between a named product and its parent company, product suite, optional module, plan, integration, hosting variant or testimonial. Vendor claims are page statements, not tested capabilities or outcome promises. Each vendor figure appears beside the corresponding median across the five mapped vendors in its category.

Construction project management software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 149. Complete category data: 92 criteria, 425 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with the buyer’s construction workflows 17/149 (11.4%) 7.2% to 17.5% Team review: in progress
Mobile access for field work 16/149 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.7% Team review: in progress
Job cost and budget tracking 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Project and task scheduling 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Drawing and document version control 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress
Project communication and collaboration 12/149 (8.1%) 4.7% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Project document storage and management 11/149 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Cost forecasting 10/149 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.9% Team review: in progress
Construction workflow tracking for RFIs, submittals and field reports 9/149 (6.0%) 3.2% to 11.1% Team review: in progress
Total cost including implementation and related charges 9/149 (6.0%) 3.2% to 11.1% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 92 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Procore Stated 20/92 (21.7%) 14.5% to 31.2% 20/92 (21.7%)
Procore Not stated 44/92 (47.8%) 37.9% to 57.9% 47/92 (51.1%)
Procore Unknown 28/92 (30.4%) 22.0% to 40.5% 17/92 (18.5%)
Buildertrend Stated 17/92 (18.5%) 11.9% to 27.6% 20/92 (21.7%)
Buildertrend Not stated 55/92 (59.8%) 49.6% to 69.2% 47/92 (51.1%)
Buildertrend Unknown 20/92 (21.7%) 14.5% to 31.2% 17/92 (18.5%)
Contractor Foreman Stated 16/92 (17.4%) 11.0% to 26.4% 20/92 (21.7%)
Contractor Foreman Not stated 60/92 (65.2%) 55.1% to 74.2% 47/92 (51.1%)
Contractor Foreman Unknown 16/92 (17.4%) 11.0% to 26.4% 17/92 (18.5%)
Fieldwire Stated 28/92 (30.4%) 22.0% to 40.5% 20/92 (21.7%)
Fieldwire Not stated 47/92 (51.1%) 41.0% to 61.1% 47/92 (51.1%)
Fieldwire Unknown 17/92 (18.5%) 11.9% to 27.6% 17/92 (18.5%)
JobTread Stated 31/92 (33.7%) 24.9% to 43.8% 20/92 (21.7%)
JobTread Not stated 45/92 (48.9%) 38.9% to 59.0% 47/92 (51.1%)
JobTread Unknown 16/92 (17.4%) 11.0% to 26.4% 17/92 (18.5%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Dealership management systems

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 159 criteria, 736 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Full total cost of ownership 14/150 (9.3%) 5.6% to 15.1% Team review: in progress
Ease of use 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Fit with the dealership’s stated business needs 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Vehicle sales and deal processing 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Connections to existing business systems 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Disclosure of applicable and additional fees 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Connected departmental operations without separate tools or duplicate entry 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Defined scope of data transferred during migration 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Implementation and launch assistance 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Supported APIs for connecting business tools 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 159 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
CDK Global Stated 11/159 (6.9%) 3.9% to 12.0% 19/159 (11.9%)
CDK Global Not stated 125/159 (78.6%) 71.6% to 84.3% 116/159 (73.0%)
CDK Global Unknown 23/159 (14.5%) 9.8% to 20.8% 24/159 (15.1%)
DealerCenter Stated 22/159 (13.8%) 9.3% to 20.1% 19/159 (11.9%)
DealerCenter Not stated 110/159 (69.2%) 61.6% to 75.8% 116/159 (73.0%)
DealerCenter Unknown 27/159 (17.0%) 11.9% to 23.6% 24/159 (15.1%)
Tekion Stated 19/159 (11.9%) 7.8% to 17.9% 19/159 (11.9%)
Tekion Not stated 116/159 (73.0%) 65.6% to 79.3% 116/159 (73.0%)
Tekion Unknown 24/159 (15.1%) 10.4% to 21.5% 24/159 (15.1%)
Dealertrack Stated 41/159 (25.8%) 19.6% to 33.1% 19/159 (11.9%)
Dealertrack Not stated 87/159 (54.7%) 47.0% to 62.3% 116/159 (73.0%)
Dealertrack Unknown 31/159 (19.5%) 14.1% to 26.3% 24/159 (15.1%)
Frazer Stated 19/159 (11.9%) 7.8% to 17.9% 19/159 (11.9%)
Frazer Not stated 116/159 (73.0%) 65.6% to 79.3% 116/159 (73.0%)
Frazer Unknown 24/159 (15.1%) 10.4% to 21.5% 24/159 (15.1%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Dental practice management software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 149. Complete category data: 155 criteria, 775 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with the practice’s stated needs and workflows 16/149 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.7% Team review: in progress
Support for future practice growth 16/149 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.7% Team review: in progress
Connections with existing clinical and business systems 15/149 (10.1%) 6.2% to 15.9% Team review: in progress
Clinical dental charting 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Compatibility with imaging software and equipment 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Digital patient intake and other forms 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Support for multiple practice locations 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Cost appropriate to the practice’s budget 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress
Patient billing workflows 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress
Appointment scheduling 12/149 (8.1%) 4.7% to 13.5% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 155 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Dentrix Stated 35/155 (22.6%) 16.7% to 29.8% 35/155 (22.6%)
Dentrix Not stated 83/155 (53.5%) 45.7% to 61.2% 83/155 (53.5%)
Dentrix Unknown 37/155 (23.9%) 17.8% to 31.2% 37/155 (23.9%)
Open Dental Stated 14/155 (9.0%) 5.5% to 14.6% 35/155 (22.6%)
Open Dental Not stated 117/155 (75.5%) 68.1% to 81.6% 83/155 (53.5%)
Open Dental Unknown 24/155 (15.5%) 10.6% to 22.0% 37/155 (23.9%)
Curve Dental Stated 30/155 (19.4%) 13.9% to 26.3% 35/155 (22.6%)
Curve Dental Not stated 90/155 (58.1%) 50.2% to 65.5% 83/155 (53.5%)
Curve Dental Unknown 35/155 (22.6%) 16.7% to 29.8% 37/155 (23.9%)
Dentrix Ascend Stated 44/155 (28.4%) 21.9% to 35.9% 35/155 (22.6%)
Dentrix Ascend Not stated 74/155 (47.7%) 40.0% to 55.6% 83/155 (53.5%)
Dentrix Ascend Unknown 37/155 (23.9%) 17.8% to 31.2% 37/155 (23.9%)
Eaglesoft Stated 41/155 (26.5%) 20.1% to 33.9% 35/155 (22.6%)
Eaglesoft Not stated 68/155 (43.9%) 36.3% to 51.7% 83/155 (53.5%)
Eaglesoft Unknown 46/155 (29.7%) 23.0% to 37.3% 37/155 (23.9%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Field service management software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 120 criteria, 714 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Mobile access and work in the field 18/150 (12.0%) 7.7% to 18.2% Team review: in progress
Accounting and financial system integration 16/150 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.6% Team review: in progress
Connections with existing business systems 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Access to service history 14/150 (9.3%) 5.6% to 15.1% Team review: in progress
Digital signatures in field workflows 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Job scheduling 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Invoicing and billing 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Operational and financial reporting 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Route planning and optimization 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Technician assignment and dispatch matched to job constraints 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 120 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Housecall Pro Stated 16/120 (13.3%) 8.4% to 20.6% 16/120 (13.3%)
Housecall Pro Not stated 86/120 (71.7%) 63.0% to 79.0% 80/120 (66.7%)
Housecall Pro Unknown 18/120 (15.0%) 9.7% to 22.5% 23/120 (19.2%)
ServiceTitan Stated 22/120 (18.3%) 12.4% to 26.2% 16/120 (13.3%)
ServiceTitan Not stated 75/120 (62.5%) 53.6% to 70.6% 80/120 (66.7%)
ServiceTitan Unknown 23/120 (19.2%) 13.1% to 27.1% 23/120 (19.2%)
Workiz Stated 15/120 (12.5%) 7.7% to 19.6% 16/120 (13.3%)
Workiz Not stated 80/120 (66.7%) 57.8% to 74.5% 80/120 (66.7%)
Workiz Unknown 25/120 (20.8%) 14.5% to 28.9% 23/120 (19.2%)
FieldPulse Stated 20/120 (16.7%) 11.1% to 24.3% 16/120 (13.3%)
FieldPulse Not stated 67/120 (55.8%) 46.9% to 64.4% 80/120 (66.7%)
FieldPulse Unknown 33/120 (27.5%) 20.3% to 36.1% 23/120 (19.2%)
Jobber Stated 11/120 (9.2%) 5.2% to 15.7% 16/120 (13.3%)
Jobber Not stated 93/120 (77.5%) 69.2% to 84.1% 80/120 (66.7%)
Jobber Unknown 16/120 (13.3%) 8.4% to 20.6% 23/120 (19.2%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Hotel property management software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 149. Complete category data: 131 criteria, 802 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with the property type, size or operating needs 32/149 (21.5%) 15.6% to 28.7% Team review: in progress
Connections to other hotel systems 20/149 (13.4%) 8.9% to 19.8% Team review: in progress
Cloud based architecture 19/149 (12.8%) 8.3% to 19.1% Team review: in progress
Channel management 15/149 (10.1%) 6.2% to 15.9% Team review: in progress
Housekeeping management or room readiness 15/149 (10.1%) 6.2% to 15.9% Team review: in progress
Reporting and analytics 15/149 (10.1%) 6.2% to 15.9% Team review: in progress
Distribution channel data synchronization 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Guest check in and check out 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Booking engine support 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress
Multi property support 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 131 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Cloudbeds Stated 51/131 (38.9%) 31.0% to 47.5% 33/131 (25.2%)
Cloudbeds Not stated 61/131 (46.6%) 38.2% to 55.1% 88/131 (67.2%)
Cloudbeds Unknown 19/131 (14.5%) 9.5% to 21.5% 11/131 (8.4%)
Stayntouch Stated 40/131 (30.5%) 23.3% to 38.9% 33/131 (25.2%)
Stayntouch Not stated 80/131 (61.1%) 52.5% to 69.0% 88/131 (67.2%)
Stayntouch Unknown 11/131 (8.4%) 4.8% to 14.4% 11/131 (8.4%)
Little Hotelier Stated 20/131 (15.3%) 10.1% to 22.4% 33/131 (25.2%)
Little Hotelier Not stated 100/131 (76.3%) 68.4% to 82.8% 88/131 (67.2%)
Little Hotelier Unknown 11/131 (8.4%) 4.8% to 14.4% 11/131 (8.4%)
Mews Stated 33/131 (25.2%) 18.5% to 33.3% 33/131 (25.2%)
Mews Not stated 88/131 (67.2%) 58.7% to 74.6% 88/131 (67.2%)
Mews Unknown 10/131 (7.6%) 4.2% to 13.5% 11/131 (8.4%)
Maestro PMS Stated 27/131 (20.6%) 14.6% to 28.3% 33/131 (25.2%)
Maestro PMS Not stated 95/131 (72.5%) 64.3% to 79.4% 88/131 (67.2%)
Maestro PMS Unknown 9/131 (6.9%) 3.7% to 12.5% 11/131 (8.4%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Insurance agency management systems

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 169 criteria, 647 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with the agency’s stated business needs 36/150 (24.0%) 17.9% to 31.4% Team review: in progress
Ease of use and manageable learning requirements 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Connections with existing business systems 14/150 (9.3%) 5.6% to 15.1% Team review: in progress
Cost appropriate to the agency budget 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Connected operations without duplicate entry or separate tools 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Data encryption 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Automation of repetitive servicing and administrative work 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Protection of client data 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Role based access permissions 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Business performance analytics 8/150 (5.3%) 2.7% to 10.2% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 169 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Applied Systems Stated 7/169 (4.1%) 2.0% to 8.3% 13/169 (7.7%)
Applied Systems Not stated 119/169 (70.4%) 63.1% to 76.8% 101/169 (59.8%)
Applied Systems Unknown 43/169 (25.4%) 19.5% to 32.5% 55/169 (32.5%)
EZLynx Stated 25/169 (14.8%) 10.2% to 20.9% 13/169 (7.7%)
EZLynx Not stated 86/169 (50.9%) 43.4% to 58.3% 101/169 (59.8%)
EZLynx Unknown 58/169 (34.3%) 27.6% to 41.8% 55/169 (32.5%)
HawkSoft Stated 13/169 (7.7%) 4.6% to 12.7% 13/169 (7.7%)
HawkSoft Not stated 101/169 (59.8%) 52.2% to 66.9% 101/169 (59.8%)
HawkSoft Unknown 55/169 (32.5%) 25.9% to 39.9% 55/169 (32.5%)
Vertafore Stated 12/169 (7.1%) 4.1% to 12.0% 13/169 (7.7%)
Vertafore Not stated 113/169 (66.9%) 59.5% to 73.5% 101/169 (59.8%)
Vertafore Unknown 44/169 (26.0%) 20.0% to 33.1% 55/169 (32.5%)
NowCerts Stated 36/169 (21.3%) 15.8% to 28.1% 13/169 (7.7%)
NowCerts Not stated 66/169 (39.1%) 32.0% to 46.6% 101/169 (59.8%)
NowCerts Unknown 67/169 (39.6%) 32.6% to 47.2% 55/169 (32.5%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 126 criteria, 950 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with the firm’s practice, size or operating needs 23/150 (15.3%) 10.4% to 22.0% Team review: in progress
Billing and invoicing 18/150 (12.0%) 7.7% to 18.2% Team review: in progress
Matter and case management 17/150 (11.3%) 7.2% to 17.4% Team review: in progress
Time capture and tracking 16/150 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.6% Team review: in progress
Trust and IOLTA accounting controls 16/150 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.6% Team review: in progress
Client communication 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Document management 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Document templates or generation 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Client portal 14/150 (9.3%) 5.6% to 15.1% Team review: in progress
Client payment workflows 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 126 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Clio Stated 20/126 (15.9%) 10.5% to 23.2% 40/126 (31.7%)
Clio Not stated 92/126 (73.0%) 64.7% to 80.0% 72/126 (57.1%)
Clio Unknown 14/126 (11.1%) 6.7% to 17.8% 14/126 (11.1%)
8am MyCase Stated 40/126 (31.7%) 24.3% to 40.3% 40/126 (31.7%)
8am MyCase Not stated 72/126 (57.1%) 48.4% to 65.4% 72/126 (57.1%)
8am MyCase Unknown 14/126 (11.1%) 6.7% to 17.8% 14/126 (11.1%)
CosmoLex Stated 43/126 (34.1%) 26.4% to 42.8% 40/126 (31.7%)
CosmoLex Not stated 68/126 (54.0%) 45.3% to 62.4% 72/126 (57.1%)
CosmoLex Unknown 15/126 (11.9%) 7.3% to 18.7% 14/126 (11.1%)
PracticePanther Stated 52/126 (41.3%) 33.1% to 50.0% 40/126 (31.7%)
PracticePanther Not stated 59/126 (46.8%) 38.3% to 55.5% 72/126 (57.1%)
PracticePanther Unknown 15/126 (11.9%) 7.3% to 18.7% 14/126 (11.1%)
Filevine Stated 18/126 (14.3%) 9.2% to 21.5% 40/126 (31.7%)
Filevine Not stated 94/126 (74.6%) 66.4% to 81.4% 72/126 (57.1%)
Filevine Unknown 14/126 (11.1%) 6.7% to 17.8% 14/126 (11.1%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Loan origination and lending software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 197 criteria, 762 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with the lender’s stated products and operating needs 32/150 (21.3%) 15.5% to 28.6% Team review: in progress
Applicable lending and jurisdictional compliance controls 16/150 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.6% Team review: in progress
Configurable lending workflows 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Full total cost of ownership 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Application and activity audit logs 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Connections with the lender’s existing systems 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Underwriting and credit assessment support 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Automation of repetitive loan processing work 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Configuration without extensive custom programming 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress
Growth in lending volumes 10/150 (6.7%) 3.7% to 11.8% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 197 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
nCino Stated 20/197 (10.2%) 6.7% to 15.2% 18/197 (9.1%)
nCino Not stated 120/197 (60.9%) 54.0% to 67.5% 120/197 (60.9%)
nCino Unknown 57/197 (28.9%) 23.1% to 35.6% 57/197 (28.9%)
MeridianLink Stated 18/197 (9.1%) 5.9% to 14.0% 18/197 (9.1%)
MeridianLink Not stated 122/197 (61.9%) 55.0% to 68.4% 120/197 (60.9%)
MeridianLink Unknown 57/197 (28.9%) 23.1% to 35.6% 57/197 (28.9%)
ICE Mortgage Technology Stated 22/197 (11.2%) 7.5% to 16.3% 18/197 (9.1%)
ICE Mortgage Technology Not stated 117/197 (59.4%) 52.4% to 66.0% 120/197 (60.9%)
ICE Mortgage Technology Unknown 58/197 (29.4%) 23.5% to 36.2% 57/197 (28.9%)
Abrigo Stated 10/197 (5.1%) 2.8% to 9.1% 18/197 (9.1%)
Abrigo Not stated 131/197 (66.5%) 59.6% to 72.7% 120/197 (60.9%)
Abrigo Unknown 56/197 (28.4%) 22.6% to 35.1% 57/197 (28.9%)
Baker Hill Stated 17/197 (8.6%) 5.5% to 13.4% 18/197 (9.1%)
Baker Hill Not stated 117/197 (59.4%) 52.4% to 66.0% 120/197 (60.9%)
Baker Hill Unknown 63/197 (32.0%) 25.9% to 38.8% 57/197 (28.9%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Radiology and medical imaging software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 149. Complete category data: 156 criteria, 705 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with stated practice needs or workflows 25/149 (16.8%) 11.6% to 23.6% Team review: in progress
Cost appropriate to the imaging practice budget 17/149 (11.4%) 7.2% to 17.5% Team review: in progress
Fit with the preferred deployment model 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress
Ease of use 12/149 (8.1%) 4.7% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Ability to grow with practice needs 11/149 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Cloud based deployment 11/149 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Costs over the system lifecycle 11/149 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Customer support 11/149 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Integration with EHR and RIS systems 11/149 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.7% Team review: in progress
Interoperability with existing systems 11/149 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.7% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 156 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Sectra Stated 31/156 (19.9%) 14.4% to 26.8% 9/156 (5.8%)
Sectra Not stated 81/156 (51.9%) 44.1% to 59.6% 101/156 (64.7%)
Sectra Unknown 44/156 (28.2%) 21.7% to 35.7% 41/156 (26.3%)
Intelerad Stated 7/156 (4.5%) 2.2% to 9.0% 9/156 (5.8%)
Intelerad Not stated 119/156 (76.3%) 69.0% to 82.3% 101/156 (64.7%)
Intelerad Unknown 30/156 (19.2%) 13.8% to 26.1% 41/156 (26.3%)
Visage Imaging Stated 9/156 (5.8%) 3.1% to 10.6% 9/156 (5.8%)
Visage Imaging Not stated 106/156 (67.9%) 60.3% to 74.8% 101/156 (64.7%)
Visage Imaging Unknown 41/156 (26.3%) 20.0% to 33.7% 41/156 (26.3%)
Fujifilm (Synapse) Stated 0/156 (0.0%) 0.0% to 2.4% 9/156 (5.8%)
Fujifilm (Synapse) Not stated 0/156 (0.0%) 0.0% to 2.4% 101/156 (64.7%)
Fujifilm (Synapse) Unknown 156/156 (100.0%) 97.6% to 100.0% 41/156 (26.3%)
RamSoft Stated 24/156 (15.4%) 10.6% to 21.9% 9/156 (5.8%)
RamSoft Not stated 101/156 (64.7%) 57.0% to 71.8% 101/156 (64.7%)
RamSoft Unknown 31/156 (19.9%) 14.4% to 26.8% 41/156 (26.3%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Residential property management software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 148. Complete category data: 151 criteria, 760 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Accounting or bookkeeping functionality 24/148 (16.2%) 11.1% to 23.0% Team review: in progress
Fit with stated portfolio characteristics or management needs 20/148 (13.5%) 8.9% to 20.0% Team review: in progress
Online rent collection and payment processing 19/148 (12.8%) 8.4% to 19.2% Team review: in progress
Scalability as the portfolio grows 17/148 (11.5%) 7.3% to 17.6% Team review: in progress
Maintenance or work order tracking 16/148 (10.8%) 6.8% to 16.8% Team review: in progress
Assignment of work to staff or external vendors 14/148 (9.5%) 5.7% to 15.3% Team review: in progress
Tenant self service portal 14/148 (9.5%) 5.7% to 15.3% Team review: in progress
Automation of repetitive property operations 12/148 (8.1%) 4.7% to 13.6% Team review: in progress
Financial reporting 12/148 (8.1%) 4.7% to 13.6% Team review: in progress
Electronic lease signatures 11/148 (7.4%) 4.2% to 12.8% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 151 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Buildium Stated 56/151 (37.1%) 29.8% to 45.0% 17/151 (11.3%)
Buildium Not stated 65/151 (43.0%) 35.4% to 51.0% 110/151 (72.8%)
Buildium Unknown 30/151 (19.9%) 14.3% to 26.9% 24/151 (15.9%)
AppFolio Stated 15/151 (9.9%) 6.1% to 15.7% 17/151 (11.3%)
AppFolio Not stated 120/151 (79.5%) 72.3% to 85.1% 110/151 (72.8%)
AppFolio Unknown 16/151 (10.6%) 6.6% to 16.5% 24/151 (15.9%)
DoorLoop Stated 66/151 (43.7%) 36.1% to 51.7% 17/151 (11.3%)
DoorLoop Not stated 61/151 (40.4%) 32.9% to 48.4% 110/151 (72.8%)
DoorLoop Unknown 24/151 (15.9%) 10.9% to 22.6% 24/151 (15.9%)
Yardi Stated 17/151 (11.3%) 7.1% to 17.3% 17/151 (11.3%)
Yardi Not stated 110/151 (72.8%) 65.3% to 79.3% 110/151 (72.8%)
Yardi Unknown 24/151 (15.9%) 10.9% to 22.6% 24/151 (15.9%)
Innago Stated 7/151 (4.6%) 2.3% to 9.3% 17/151 (11.3%)
Innago Not stated 134/151 (88.7%) 82.7% to 92.9% 110/151 (72.8%)
Innago Unknown 10/151 (6.6%) 3.6% to 11.8% 24/151 (15.9%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Transportation management systems

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 150 criteria, 720 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with the stated transportation operating needs 28/150 (18.7%) 13.2% to 25.7% Team review: in progress
Automation of repetitive transportation work 17/150 (11.3%) 7.2% to 17.4% Team review: in progress
Shipment tracking and status visibility 16/150 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.6% Team review: in progress
Route planning and optimization 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Transportation reporting and analytics 14/150 (9.3%) 5.6% to 15.1% Team review: in progress
Connections with existing transportation and business systems 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Invoice reconciliation and freight charge audits 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Support for required freight transportation modes 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% Team review: in progress
Carrier selection 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Delivery service reporting 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 150 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
AscendTMS Stated 55/150 (36.7%) 29.4% to 44.6% 36/150 (24.0%)
AscendTMS Not stated 50/150 (33.3%) 26.3% to 41.2% 90/150 (60.0%)
AscendTMS Unknown 45/150 (30.0%) 23.2% to 37.8% 24/150 (16.0%)
Alvys Stated 36/150 (24.0%) 17.9% to 31.4% 36/150 (24.0%)
Alvys Not stated 90/150 (60.0%) 52.0% to 67.5% 90/150 (60.0%)
Alvys Unknown 24/150 (16.0%) 11.0% to 22.7% 24/150 (16.0%)
Oracle Transportation Management Stated 23/150 (15.3%) 10.4% to 22.0% 36/150 (24.0%)
Oracle Transportation Management Not stated 100/150 (66.7%) 58.8% to 73.7% 90/150 (60.0%)
Oracle Transportation Management Unknown 27/150 (18.0%) 12.7% to 24.9% 24/150 (16.0%)
Tai TMS Stated 39/150 (26.0%) 19.6% to 33.6% 36/150 (24.0%)
Tai TMS Not stated 87/150 (58.0%) 50.0% to 65.6% 90/150 (60.0%)
Tai TMS Unknown 24/150 (16.0%) 11.0% to 22.7% 24/150 (16.0%)
SAP Transportation Management Stated 13/150 (8.7%) 5.1% to 14.3% 36/150 (24.0%)
SAP Transportation Management Not stated 114/150 (76.0%) 68.6% to 82.1% 90/150 (60.0%)
SAP Transportation Management Unknown 23/150 (15.3%) 10.4% to 22.0% 24/150 (16.0%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Veterinary practice management software

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 149. Complete category data: 141 criteria, 782 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Cloud based operation 21/149 (14.1%) 9.4% to 20.6% Team review: in progress
Ease of use 21/149 (14.1%) 9.4% to 20.6% Team review: in progress
Electronic medical records 17/149 (11.4%) 7.2% to 17.5% Team review: in progress
Inventory tracking 17/149 (11.4%) 7.2% to 17.5% Team review: in progress
Billing and invoicing 16/149 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.7% Team review: in progress
Working connections to existing practice systems 15/149 (10.1%) 6.2% to 15.9% Team review: in progress
Laboratory and diagnostic system connections 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
SOAP notes or SOAP charting templates 14/149 (9.4%) 5.7% to 15.2% Team review: in progress
Appointment scheduling 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress
Low stock and reorder alerts 13/149 (8.7%) 5.2% to 14.4% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 141 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
ezyVet Stated 14/141 (9.9%) 6.0% to 16.0% 20/141 (14.2%)
ezyVet Not stated 116/141 (82.3%) 75.1% to 87.7% 110/141 (78.0%)
ezyVet Unknown 11/141 (7.8%) 4.4% to 13.4% 11/141 (7.8%)
IDEXX (Cornerstone, Neo) Stated 20/141 (14.2%) 9.4% to 20.9% 20/141 (14.2%)
IDEXX (Cornerstone, Neo) Not stated 110/141 (78.0%) 70.5% to 84.1% 110/141 (78.0%)
IDEXX (Cornerstone, Neo) Unknown 11/141 (7.8%) 4.4% to 13.4% 11/141 (7.8%)
Digitail Stated 44/141 (31.2%) 24.1% to 39.3% 20/141 (14.2%)
Digitail Not stated 82/141 (58.2%) 49.9% to 66.0% 110/141 (78.0%)
Digitail Unknown 15/141 (10.6%) 6.6% to 16.8% 11/141 (7.8%)
DaySmart Vet Stated 42/141 (29.8%) 22.9% to 37.8% 20/141 (14.2%)
DaySmart Vet Not stated 85/141 (60.3%) 52.0% to 68.0% 110/141 (78.0%)
DaySmart Vet Unknown 14/141 (9.9%) 6.0% to 16.0% 11/141 (7.8%)
Shepherd Stated 16/141 (11.3%) 7.1% to 17.6% 20/141 (14.2%)
Shepherd Not stated 115/141 (81.6%) 74.4% to 87.1% 110/141 (78.0%)
Shepherd Unknown 10/141 (7.1%) 3.9% to 12.6% 11/141 (7.8%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

CRM

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 119 criteria, 1027 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Workflow automation 40/150 (26.7%) 20.2% to 34.3% Team review: in progress
Fit with the buyer’s business or operating needs 36/150 (24.0%) 17.9% to 31.4% Team review: in progress
Ease of use or adoption 31/150 (20.7%) 15.0% to 27.8% Team review: in progress
Reports, dashboards or business analytics 29/150 (19.3%) 13.8% to 26.4% Team review: in progress
Configuration to fit business processes 25/150 (16.7%) 11.6% to 23.4% Team review: in progress
Deal and sales pipeline management 24/150 (16.0%) 11.0% to 22.7% Team review: in progress
Connections with the buyer’s existing business tools 21/150 (14.0%) 9.3% to 20.5% Team review: in progress
Sales and revenue forecasting 20/150 (13.3%) 8.8% to 19.7% Team review: in progress
Ability to support business growth 19/150 (12.7%) 8.3% to 18.9% Team review: in progress
Cost appropriate to the buyer’s budget and scale 18/150 (12.0%) 7.7% to 18.2% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 119 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
HubSpot CRM Stated 17/119 (14.3%) 9.1% to 21.7% 17/119 (14.3%)
HubSpot CRM Not stated 74/119 (62.2%) 53.2% to 70.4% 72/119 (60.5%)
HubSpot CRM Unknown 28/119 (23.5%) 16.8% to 31.9% 28/119 (23.5%)
Salesforce Sales Cloud Stated 5/119 (4.2%) 1.8% to 9.5% 17/119 (14.3%)
Salesforce Sales Cloud Not stated 64/119 (53.8%) 44.8% to 62.5% 72/119 (60.5%)
Salesforce Sales Cloud Unknown 50/119 (42.0%) 33.5% to 51.0% 28/119 (23.5%)
Pipedrive Stated 41/119 (34.5%) 26.5% to 43.4% 17/119 (14.3%)
Pipedrive Not stated 54/119 (45.4%) 36.7% to 54.3% 72/119 (60.5%)
Pipedrive Unknown 24/119 (20.2%) 13.9% to 28.3% 28/119 (23.5%)
Zoho CRM Stated 2/119 (1.7%) 0.5% to 5.9% 17/119 (14.3%)
Zoho CRM Not stated 87/119 (73.1%) 64.5% to 80.3% 72/119 (60.5%)
Zoho CRM Unknown 30/119 (25.2%) 18.3% to 33.7% 28/119 (23.5%)
Microsoft Dynamics 365 Stated 20/119 (16.8%) 11.2% to 24.5% 17/119 (14.3%)
Microsoft Dynamics 365 Not stated 72/119 (60.5%) 51.5% to 68.8% 72/119 (60.5%)
Microsoft Dynamics 365 Unknown 27/119 (22.7%) 16.1% to 31.0% 28/119 (23.5%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Project management

Explore every criterion and its supporting evidence.

Most frequently stated criteria

Answer base: 150. Complete category data: 137 criteria, 742 exact answer spans. Counts refer to distinct answers in the eligible prefix.

Criterion Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Review
Fit with stated team needs or workflows 37/150 (24.7%) 18.5% to 32.1% Team review: in progress
Scalability as needs grow 18/150 (12.0%) 7.7% to 18.2% Team review: in progress
Reporting functionality 17/150 (11.3%) 7.2% to 17.4% Team review: in progress
Ease of use and adoption 16/150 (10.7%) 6.7% to 16.6% Team review: in progress
Full ownership costs including implementation and add ons 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Working connections to existing business systems 15/150 (10.0%) 6.2% to 15.8% Team review: in progress
Product or vendor security 14/150 (9.3%) 5.6% to 15.1% Team review: in progress
Manageable complexity or administrative effort 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Task dependencies 12/150 (8.0%) 4.6% to 13.5% Team review: in progress
Applicable compliance requirements 11/150 (7.3%) 4.1% to 12.7% Team review: in progress

The complete criteria and evidence tables identify each source answer, engine, question, run, capture date, exact offset and supporting hash. Repeated passages in an answer count once for a criterion.

Dated vendor page comparisons

Base for each vendor: 137 category criteria. Each median is the corresponding count and rate across the same five mapped vendors, including zeros. Unknown includes partial or unsuitable product scope. Not stated means not stated on the dated page, never a missing product feature.

Vendor Page state Count/base and rate Wilson 95 percent Category median
Asana Stated 26/137 (19.0%) 13.3% to 26.4% 31/137 (22.6%)
Asana Not stated 82/137 (59.9%) 51.5% to 67.7% 82/137 (59.9%)
Asana Unknown 29/137 (21.2%) 15.2% to 28.7% 25/137 (18.2%)
ClickUp Stated 35/137 (25.5%) 19.0% to 33.4% 31/137 (22.6%)
ClickUp Not stated 74/137 (54.0%) 45.7% to 62.1% 82/137 (59.9%)
ClickUp Unknown 28/137 (20.4%) 14.5% to 28.0% 25/137 (18.2%)
Jira Stated 18/137 (13.1%) 8.5% to 19.8% 31/137 (22.6%)
Jira Not stated 97/137 (70.8%) 62.7% to 77.8% 82/137 (59.9%)
Jira Unknown 22/137 (16.1%) 10.9% to 23.1% 25/137 (18.2%)
Smartsheet Stated 31/137 (22.6%) 16.4% to 30.3% 31/137 (22.6%)
Smartsheet Not stated 83/137 (60.6%) 52.2% to 68.4% 82/137 (59.9%)
Smartsheet Unknown 23/137 (16.8%) 11.5% to 23.9% 25/137 (18.2%)
Wrike Stated 39/137 (28.5%) 21.6% to 36.5% 31/137 (22.6%)
Wrike Not stated 73/137 (53.3%) 45.0% to 61.4% 82/137 (59.9%)
Wrike Unknown 25/137 (18.2%) 12.7% to 25.6% 25/137 (18.2%)

Team review: in progress. The full vendor page table preserves every page URL, actual read date, snapshot hash, evidence offset and scope note. Category medians summarize these five pages; they are not a quality benchmark.

Reproducibility and review

The complete public data contains every criterion, supporting answer reference, exact character offset, source hash, engine, question, run, capture date, attached citation and scoped vendor page comparison. We publish summary tables here and the full data alongside the report.

The original answers are available from the source DOI. Every answer and shared source field in the 2,250 deposited rows matches the frozen research source. File and answer hashes identify the published source asset and the exact supporting passages. The study uses the scheduled category questions and the documented exclusions. The public release does not redistribute Perplexity answer quotations. Their original source identifiers, character offsets and quotation and answer hashes remain available for verification against the original deposit.

Semantic coding and dated page comparisons follow the published rules. Independent analyst review remains in progress. Every criterion remains labelled Team review: in progress until authentic returned decisions are validated against the exact evidence fingerprints. An unsigned workbook does not create verification.

Complete data and source verification

The accompanying files provide all observations, not only the displayed rows. records.csv records every scheduled category input and its exclusion status. criteria.csv contains every canonical criterion with count, base, interval and repeat counts. evidence.csv contains each supporting answer reference and exact source pointer. adjacency.csv contains explicit same answer vendor associations. vendor_pages.csv preserves each dated and scoped comparison. vendor_summaries.csv contains every vendor figure and its category median. study7-index.json joins these tables in one versioned contract.

Original answers and frozen source release. The source asset and answer hashes in the data allow exact verification against the original deposit. Character offsets use Unicode characters; SHA256 hashes use UTF8 text. The supplied public verifier recomputes counts, intervals and medians and checks the source references.

Product and corrections

Checklist Audit $490. Every figure comes from the published method, v1.1.

Any named company may request one no-cost re-run at index@broadcastwell.com; both results are published.

CC BY 4.0. Source material remains attributable to its original source. The published data describes dated observations, not product performance or a promised outcome.

Study DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23271935.

Observed answers on stated dates, not a ranking. This is not a judgment of product quality.

The monthly letter of the Absence Index

The Absence Report

Who AI engines name, what the evidence shows and what it means for B2B software teams.

Subscribe on Substack

Free. Monthly. Unsubscribe any time. Record Watch is a separate subscription.