Ecommerce search and merchandising · November 2026 Edition
Algolia vs Hawksearch
Two of fourteen models named Algolia first on the direct prompt; one named Hawksearch. Algolia was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Hawksearch by nine and Algolia carries 57 labels and Hawksearch 14, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Paris, France, founded 2012. Named in two categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share24%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate21%7%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#5A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels5714A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Algolia reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Luigi's Box was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Algolia vs Luigi's Box · Algolia vs Doofinder · Algolia vs Constructor
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 ecommerce search and merchandising page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
AlgoliaFirst choices, of fourteen modelsHawksearch
Direct21
Paraphrase73
Comparative50
Budget-constrained204 against Algolia
Scale-constrained10
Negative008 against Algolia · 1 against Hawksearch
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.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Algolia and Hawksearch 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 | | | | | |
Algolia Hawksearch first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Algolia on the left and Hawksearch on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Algolia and Hawksearch stood in it.
Algolia first, Hawksearch not the choice
2 of 14 modelsHawksearch was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-5.4 miniAlgolia alternatives: Adobe Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Salesforce B2B Commerce, Searchspring
GPT-6 LunaAlgolia alternatives: Constructor, Klevu, Searchspring
Hawksearch first, Algolia an alternative
1 of 14 modelsAlgolia was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Gemini 3.5 FlashHawksearch alternatives: Algolia, Bloomreach Discovery, Coveo for Commerce, Klevu
Neither was the first choice, one was named
9 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Perplexity SonarLuigi's Box alternatives: Coveo for Commerce, Hawksearch
Grok 4.20Constructor alternatives: Algolia, Athos Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Luigi's Box
Mistral SmallConstructor, Luigi's Box alternatives: Clerk.io, Coveo for Commerce, Hawksearch
DeepSeek V4 FlashLuigi's Box alternatives: Athos Commerce, Hawksearch, Klevu
Qwen 3.7 FlashLuigi's Box alternatives: Algolia, Bloomreach Discovery, Hawksearch
Kimi K2Klevu alternatives: Algolia, Athos Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery
GLM 4.7 FlashXAthos Commerce alternatives: Algolia, Constructor, Luigi's Box
MiniMax M2.5Luigi's Box alternatives: Athos Commerce, Clerk.io, Hawksearch
Muse Glimmer 30BLuigi's Box alternatives: Bloomreach Discovery, Constructor, Hawksearch
Neither was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Klevu alternatives: BigCommerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Nosto, Searchspring
Llama 4 MaverickLuigi's Box alternatives: Athos Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Clerk.io, Constructor
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
Algolia leads by eleven points.
Algolia15%#2 of 15Hawksearch4%#7 of 15Mid-marketThe figures above
Algolia leads by sixteen points.
Algolia24%#1 of 14Hawksearch8%#5 of 14Enterprise
What the models said about Algolia
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Algolia has a relatively high negative sentiment share (19% of labels negative) and is criticized for its consumption-based pricing model” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“Algolia — High risk on pricing, support ... If you're a small-to-mid-size retailer with variable traffic, this is a genuine risk.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Charging is per keystroke/request, which can balloon costs as traffic grows. It's developer-heavy — not for non-technical teams.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“Algolia is recognized as the best overall ecommerce search engine for fast, AI-driven search with deep developer flexibility and strong analytics.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
“Request demos from 3-4 vendors that match your profile (likely Algolia, Constructor, Luigi's Box, and one other)” Kimi K2 · scale prompt · first choice
“Choose Algolia if you have strong dev resources and want maximum flexibility with fast implementation” Kimi K2 · comparative prompt · first choice
What the models said about Hawksearch
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“recurring complaints regarding stability and modernization... Users frequently report software bugs and unexplained outages” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“HawkSearch (Best Purpose-Built B2B Solution)... Choose HawkSearch if you are a traditional B2B manufacturer/distributor with heavily spec-based products” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“HawkSearch – *Best Overall Dedicated B2B Search Engine*” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“1. Hawksearch (Best Overall for Your Situation)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared
Algolia vs Luigi's BoxAlgolia vs DoofinderAlgolia vs ConstructorAlgolia vs KlevuAlgolia vs SearchaniseAlgolia vs Bloomreach DiscoveryLuigi's Box vs HawksearchDoofinder vs HawksearchConstructor vs HawksearchHawksearch vs KlevuHawksearch vs SearchaniseHawksearch vs Bloomreach DiscoveryAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full ecommerce search 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.