Clearview Social vs Postiv
Two of fourteen models named Clearview Social first on the direct prompt; one named Postiv. Clearview Social was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Postiv by six and Clearview Social carries 23 labels and Postiv 10, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Postiv
accepted challengerNamed in two categories this edition.
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 employee advocacy platforms page.
By framing
Clearview SocialFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPostivAcross every category in the November 2026 Edition, Clearview Social and Postiv were named in the same answer eighteen times, of the 74 answers naming Clearview Social and the 32 naming Postiv. In those answers Postiv took the first choice eight times and Clearview Social five.
Every model, every framing
| Model | DirectPO | ParaphrasePO | ComparativePO | Budget-constrainedPO | Scale-constrainedPO | NegativePO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | ||||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | ||||
| Perplexity Sonar | | |||||
| Grok 4.20 | ||||||
| Mistral Small | | PO | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | ||||||
| Llama 4 Maverick | PO | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | PO | ||||
| Kimi K2 | PO | | ||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | PO | PO | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | ||||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | PO | PO | |
Clearview SocialPO Postiv first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Clearview Social on the left and Postiv on the right.The direct prompt
Clearview Social first, Postiv an alternative
2 of 14 modelsPostiv was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Postiv first, Clearview Social an alternative
1 of 14 modelsClearview Social was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
10 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
Clearview Social12%#3 of 16Clearview Social8%#4 of 13Clearview Social2%#– of 11What the models said about Clearview Social
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“a stronger standalone option for up to 50 advocates, but substantially pricier at about $425/month” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · soft negative
“Clearview Social for small teams: From $425/mo” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · soft negative
“Clearview Social: Starting at $425/month, it's designed for small teams and offers content discovery and easy sharing options.” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
“The best employee advocacy platform for a company with a limited budget is Clearview Social” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with Clearview Social if you want transparent pricing and proven mid-market fit” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Postiv
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“the best tool for employees to share company content on social media for a mid-sized B2B company would be Postiv, Ambassify, or GetViews.AI” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation for Flexibility: Postiv ... frequently ranks as the top choice for teams of up to 200 people” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Postiv is our #1 pick for companies up to about 200 people and for agencies.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
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.