Customer success platforms · November 2026 Edition
Gainsight Customer Success vs Planhat
One of fourteen models named Gainsight Customer Success first on the direct prompt; one named Planhat. Both were named by all fourteen models and Gainsight Customer Success carries 64 labels and Planhat 49, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in three categories this edition.
First-choice share4%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate58%10%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 9; printed, not drawn.
Labels6449A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Gainsight Customer Success reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Vitally was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. ChurnZero vs Gainsight Customer Success · ChurnZero vs Planhat · Vitally vs Gainsight Customer Success
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the customer success platforms page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Gainsight Customer SuccessFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPlanhat
Direct116 against Gainsight Customer Success
Paraphrase106 against Gainsight Customer Success
Comparative90
Budget-constrained006 against Gainsight Customer Success · 1 against Planhat
Scale-constrained006 against Gainsight Customer Success
Negative0013 against Gainsight Customer Success · 4 against Planhat
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Gainsight Customer Success and Planhat were named in the same answer 115 times, of the 181 answers naming Gainsight Customer Success and the 187 naming Planhat. In those answers Planhat took the first choice six times and Gainsight Customer Success forty-one.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Gainsight Customer Success and Planhat stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | | | |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | | |
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | | ||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | ||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | | |
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | ||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | | |
Gainsight Customer Success Planhat first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Gainsight Customer Success on the left and Planhat on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Gainsight Customer Success and Planhat stood in it.
Gainsight Customer Success first, Planhat not the choice
1 of 14 modelsPlanhat was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-5.4 miniChurnZero, Gainsight Customer Success alternatives: HubSpot Customer Success Workspace, Totango, Vitally
Planhat first, Gainsight Customer Success not the choice
1 of 14 modelsGainsight Customer Success was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.MiniMax M2.5ChurnZero, Planhat alternatives: Catalyst, Skalin, Totango, Vitally
Neither was the first choice, one was named
10 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Gemini 3.5 FlashChurnZero alternatives: ClientSuccess, Planhat, Totango, Vitally
Perplexity SonarChurnZero alternatives: Planhat, Vitally
Grok 4.20ChurnZero alternatives: Planhat, Vitally
Mistral SmallChurnZero alternatives: HubSpot Service Hub, Planhat, Vitally
DeepSeek V4 FlashChurnZero, ClientSuccess alternatives: Planhat, Vitally
Qwen 3.7 FlashVitally alternatives: ChurnZero, Planhat, Totango
Kimi K2ChurnZero alternatives: Planhat, Vitally
GLM 4.7 FlashXChurnZero alternatives: Planhat, Skalin, Totango, Vitally
GPT-6 LunaVitally alternatives: ChurnZero, Planhat
Muse Glimmer 30BChurnZero alternatives: ClientSuccess, Planhat, Vitally
Neither was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
Llama 4 MaverickChurnZero alternatives: Custify, Vitally
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Level: the same share of first choices.
Gainsight Customer Success0%#10 of 10Planhat0%#9 of 10Mid-marketThe figures above
Gainsight Customer Success leads by two points.
Gainsight Customer Success4%#5 of 9Planhat2%#6 of 9Enterprise
Gainsight Customer Success leads by fifty-six points.
Gainsight Customer Success65%#1 of 9Planhat10%#3 of 9What the models said about Gainsight Customer Success
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Consider only if you have dedicated admin resources and a clear implementation plan. Many experienced CSMs actively dislike it.” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Gainsight if you have fewer than 10 Customer Success employees and no dedicated Ops person.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Gainsight, ChurnZero, and similar enterprise-focused tools at this stage” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · hard negative
“A mature, feature-deep enterprise suite with health scores, playbooks, and journey orchestration, recognized as a Gartner Magic Quadrant leader” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
“Widely considered the industry standard for enterprise customer success. It is highly robust but also complex to implement.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Gainsight - Industry-leading customer success platform with strong analytics, health scoring, and automated workflows.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Planhat
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of five in this category shown.
“Called "useless" in some threads, possibly due to rollout or fit, with complaints about it not delivering intended value.” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Steep learning curve for customization... Some users report it as "useless"” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“ChurnZero or Planhat are generally considered the best balance of functionality and usability” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Mid-market companies wanting a balance of power and ease of use | 3–4 months | Strong admin experience, clean UX, and fast implementation” GLM 4.7 FlashX · scale prompt · alternative
“Flexible for mid-market, with strong analytics, segmentation, and growth tools. Scales to enterprise but starts simpler.” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · alternative
Also compared
ChurnZero vs Gainsight Customer SuccessChurnZero vs PlanhatVitally vs Gainsight Customer SuccessVitally vs PlanhatHubSpot Service Hub vs Gainsight Customer SuccessHubSpot Service Hub vs PlanhatCustify vs Gainsight Customer SuccessCustify vs PlanhatGainsight Customer Success vs TotangoGainsight Customer Success vs ClientSuccessPlanhat vs TotangoPlanhat vs ClientSuccessAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full customer success standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.