Ecommerce search and merchandising · November 2026 Edition
Doofinder vs Klevu
Zero of fourteen models named Doofinder first on the direct prompt; two named Klevu. Doofinder was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Klevu by eleven and Doofinder carries 31 labels and Klevu 28, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share20%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate16%21%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#6A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels3128A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Doofinder 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 Doofinder · Algolia vs Klevu · Luigi's Box vs Doofinder
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.
DoofinderFirst choices, of fourteen modelsKlevu
Direct021 against Doofinder
Paraphrase011 against Doofinder
Comparative00
Budget-constrained1001 against Klevu
Scale-constrained00
Negative003 against Doofinder · 5 against Klevu
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, Doofinder and Klevu were named in the same answer thirty-five times, of the 98 answers naming Doofinder and the 70 naming Klevu. In those answers Klevu took the first choice two times and Doofinder eleven.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Doofinder and Klevu 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 | | | |
Doofinder Klevu first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Doofinder on the left and Klevu on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Doofinder and Klevu stood in it.
Klevu first, Doofinder not the choice
2 of 14 modelsDoofinder was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Klevu alternatives: BigCommerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Nosto, Searchspring
Kimi K2Klevu alternatives: Algolia, Athos Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery
Neither was the first choice, one was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Gemini 3.5 FlashHawksearch alternatives: Algolia, Bloomreach Discovery, Coveo for Commerce, Klevu
DeepSeek V4 FlashLuigi's Box alternatives: Athos Commerce, Hawksearch, Klevu
GPT-6 LunaAlgolia alternatives: Constructor, Klevu, Searchspring
Neither was named
9 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniAlgolia alternatives: Adobe Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Salesforce B2B Commerce, Searchspring
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
Llama 4 MaverickLuigi's Box alternatives: Athos Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Clerk.io, Constructor
Qwen 3.7 FlashLuigi's Box alternatives: Algolia, Bloomreach Discovery, Hawksearch
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
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
Doofinder leads by thirty-eight points.
Doofinder40%#1 of 15Klevu2%#9 of 15Mid-marketThe figures above
Doofinder leads by fourteen points.
Doofinder20%#3 of 14Klevu6%#6 of 14Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Doofinder2%#– of 10Klevu2%#6 of 10What the models said about Doofinder
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Query/bill shock ... weak merchandising/personalization/recommendations ... support that drops off after onboarding” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“reported limitations include shallow personalization and fewer advanced discovery capabilities” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“noted for having a relatively high negative sentiment (12%) and is considered a new entrant” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative
“Go with Doofinder if you want an easy, full-featured search and merchandising tool with a minimal learning curve and affordable starting plans.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with Doofinder if you can afford roughly $50–$80/month, as it provides the most complete "search + merchandising" toolset.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“The best ecommerce search and merchandising platform for a company with a limited budget is Doofinder.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Klevu
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Enterprise tools like Klevu, Searchspring, or Constructor: Overkill and expensive” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Klevu — can be strong, but pricing/ops fit may vary, and you should test merchandising UX deeply.” GPT-5.4 mini · negative prompt · soft negative
“The combined cost can escalate quickly and becomes significantly higher than competitors” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Klevu is an ecommerce search and navigation platform built for mid-market brands... It provides fast setup, AI-enhanced semantic search, self-service merchandising” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Start with Hawksearch or Klevu if you want a balance of ease-of-use, B2B-specific features, reasonable pricing, and quick implementation” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Klevu (now part of Athos Commerce) ⭐ *Best Overall for Mid-Market*” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Algolia vs DoofinderAlgolia vs KlevuLuigi's Box vs DoofinderLuigi's Box vs KlevuDoofinder vs ConstructorDoofinder vs HawksearchDoofinder vs SearchaniseDoofinder vs Bloomreach DiscoveryConstructor vs KlevuHawksearch vs KlevuKlevu vs SearchaniseKlevu 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.