Gane Index
All indexesEvery index and its categoriesGTMMarketing, sales, customer and revenue operations softwareITSecurity, IT operations, cloud, developer and data softwareHRHR, payroll, recruiting, performance and learning softwareFinanceAccounting, planning, spend, billing and treasury software
Claim your listing
Index › GTM › Marketing › Ecommerce search › Hawksearch vs Bloomreach Discovery
Ecommerce search and merchandising · November 2026 Edition

Hawksearch vs Bloomreach Discovery

One of fourteen models named Hawksearch first on the direct prompt; zero named Bloomreach Discovery. Hawksearch was named by nine of the fourteen models and Bloomreach Discovery by fourteen and Hawksearch carries 14 labels and Bloomreach Discovery 44, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Hawksearch

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

Bloomreach Discovery

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share8%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate7%16%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#8A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels1444A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Hawksearch 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 Hawksearch · Algolia vs Bloomreach Discovery · Luigi's Box vs Hawksearch

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.
HawksearchFirst choices, of fourteen modelsBloomreach Discovery
Direct10
Paraphrase311 against Bloomreach Discovery
Comparative00
Budget-constrained00
Scale-constrained011 against Bloomreach Discovery
Negative001 against Hawksearch · 5 against Bloomreach Discovery
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, Hawksearch and Bloomreach Discovery were named in the same answer twenty-one times, of the 37 answers naming Hawksearch and the 139 naming Bloomreach Discovery. In those answers Bloomreach Discovery took the first choice three times and Hawksearch two.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Hawksearch and Bloomreach Discovery stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
Hawksearch Bloomreach Discovery first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Hawksearch on the left and Bloomreach Discovery on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Hawksearch and Bloomreach Discovery stood in it.

Hawksearch first, Bloomreach Discovery an alternative

1 of 14 modelsBloomreach Discovery 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

11 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5Klevu alternatives: BigCommerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Nosto, Searchspring
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
DeepSeek V4 FlashLuigi's Box alternatives: Athos Commerce, Hawksearch, Klevu
Llama 4 MaverickLuigi's Box alternatives: Athos Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery, Clerk.io, Constructor
Qwen 3.7 FlashLuigi's Box alternatives: Algolia, Bloomreach Discovery, Hawksearch
Kimi K2Klevu alternatives: Algolia, Athos Commerce, Bloomreach Discovery
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.
GLM 4.7 FlashXAthos Commerce alternatives: Algolia, Constructor, Luigi's Box
GPT-6 LunaAlgolia alternatives: Constructor, Klevu, Searchspring

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
Hawksearch leads by four points.
Hawksearch4%#7 of 15
Bloomreach Discovery0%#15 of 15
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Hawksearch leads by four points.
Hawksearch8%#5 of 14
Bloomreach Discovery4%#8 of 14
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Bloomreach Discovery leads at enterprise.
Bloomreach Discovery19%#3 of 10
Hawksearch0%#– of 10
The full enterprise standing →

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

What the models said about Bloomreach Discovery

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“Platforms to Approach with Caution or Potentially Avoid - Bloomreach Discovery ... Frequently criticized for high costs relative to results” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“criticized for being complex and costly for mid-market or smaller retailers” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“SMBs & Mid-Market: These platforms carry steep annual contract minimums ... Avoid them unless you have dedicated merchandising teams” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Algolia or Bloomreach Discovery are top choices due to their robust features, scalability, and AI capabilities” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Want fastest time-to-value and strong merchandising team empowerment? → Constructor, Bloomreach, or Nosto.” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · first choice
“Best AI-Powered Visual Merchandising... Trade-off: Enterprise-oriented pricing structure; may be over-engineered for smaller mid-market businesses.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · alternative
Also compared
Algolia vs HawksearchAlgolia vs Bloomreach DiscoveryLuigi's Box vs HawksearchLuigi's Box vs Bloomreach DiscoveryDoofinder vs HawksearchDoofinder vs Bloomreach DiscoveryConstructor vs HawksearchConstructor vs Bloomreach DiscoveryHawksearch vs KlevuHawksearch vs SearchaniseKlevu vs Bloomreach DiscoverySearchanise 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.