Index › GTM › Marketing › Employee advocacy › Postiv vs Sharebee
Employee advocacy platforms · November 2026 Edition

Postiv vs Sharebee

One of fourteen models named Postiv first on the direct prompt; two named Sharebee. Postiv was named by six of the fourteen models and Sharebee by seven and Postiv carries 10 labels and Sharebee 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Postiv

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

Sharebee

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share6%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1013A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Postiv reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Oktopost was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. Oktopost vs Postiv · Oktopost vs Sharebee · EveryoneSocial vs Postiv

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

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
PostivFirst choices, of fourteen modelsSharebee
Direct12
Paraphrase10
Comparative00
Budget-constrained10
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
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 Postiv and Sharebee stood in it.
ModelDirectPOParaphrasePOComparativePOBudget-constrainedPOScale-constrainedPONegativePO
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.20
Mistral SmallPO
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 MaverickPO
Qwen 3.7 FlashPO
Kimi K2PO
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5POPO
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30BPOPO
PO Postiv SharebeePO first choicePO named as an alternativePO argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Postiv on the left and Sharebee on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Postiv and Sharebee stood in it.

Both were the first choice

1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.
Muse Glimmer 30BPostiv, Sharebee alternatives: Clearview Social, Oktopost, Vulse

Sharebee first, Postiv not the choice

1 of 14 modelsPostiv was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GLM 4.7 FlashXSharebee alternatives: DSMN8, Vulse

Neither was the first choice, one was named

4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Perplexity SonarOktopost alternatives: DSMN8, EveryoneSocial, Sharebee, Supergrow
Grok 4.20Sociabble alternatives: EveryoneSocial, GaggleAMP, Sharebee
Mistral SmallClearview Social alternatives: DSMN8, Oktopost, Sharebee
Kimi K2Clearview Social alternatives: Oktopost, Postiv, Vulse

Neither was named

8 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5PostBeyond alternatives: GaggleAMP, Oktopost, Taplio
GPT-5.4 miniOktopost alternatives: DSMN8, Poppulo, Sociabble
Gemini 3.5 FlashDSMN8, Oktopost alternatives: EveryoneSocial, GaggleAMP, Sprout Social Employee Advocacy
DeepSeek V4 FlashDSMN8, Oktopost alternatives: EveryoneSocial, Sociabble, Sprout Social Employee Advocacy
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashDSMN8, Oktopost alternatives: Clearview Social, Postiv.ai, Sprout Social Employee Advocacy
MiniMax M2.5Oktopost alternatives: DSMN8, Sociabble, Sprout Social Employee Advocacy
GPT-6 LunaOktopost alternatives: DSMN8, EveryoneSocial

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
Postiv leads by twelve points.
Postiv15%#2 of 16
Sharebee4%#– of 16
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Postiv leads by two points.
Postiv6%#5 of 13
Sharebee4%#6 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Postiv0%#– of 11
Sharebee0%#– of 11
The full enterprise standing →

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

What the models said about Sharebee

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

“Sharebee is the platform we most often recommend to B2B organisations where LinkedIn is the primary battlefield.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“Sharebee if you want a focused, LinkedIn-first solution with strong gamification” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
“Sharebee, which is a LinkedIn-first employee advocacy platform with multichannel support and a user-friendly interface” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · alternative
Also compared

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.