Territory and quota planning · November 2026 Edition
CaptivateIQ Planning vs Lative
Eleven of fourteen models named CaptivateIQ Planning first on the direct prompt; one named Lative. CaptivateIQ Planning was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Lative by nine and CaptivateIQ Planning carries 53 labels and Lative 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share47%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate6%23%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#7A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels5313A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, CaptivateIQ Planning reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Fullcast Plan was named alongside these two in eight of the fourteen direct answers. CaptivateIQ Planning vs Everstage · CaptivateIQ Planning vs Fullcast Plan · CaptivateIQ Planning vs Maptive
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 territory and quota planning page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
CaptivateIQ PlanningFirst choices, of fourteen modelsLative
Direct111
Paraphrase110
Comparative30
Budget-constrained002 against CaptivateIQ Planning · 3 against Lative
Scale-constrained30
Negative001 against CaptivateIQ Planning
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 CaptivateIQ Planning and Lative 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 | | |
CaptivateIQ Planning Lative first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, CaptivateIQ Planning on the left and Lative on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where CaptivateIQ Planning and Lative stood in it.
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.Mistral SmallCaptivateIQ Planning, Lative alternatives: Fullcast Plan, Xactly, ZoomInfo
CaptivateIQ Planning first, Lative not the choice
10 of 14 modelsLative was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5CaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: Maptive, Pipedrive, Salesforce Maps, Salesforce Sales Planning, eSpatial
Perplexity SonarCaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: Fullcast Plan, Pigment, QuotaPath
Grok 4.20CaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: Fullcast Plan, QuotaPath
DeepSeek V4 FlashCaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: Fullcast Plan, Pigment
Llama 4 MaverickCaptivateIQ Planning
Qwen 3.7 FlashCaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: Fullcast Plan, QuotaPath, Visdum, Xactly
Kimi K2CaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: QuotaPath, Visdum
GLM 4.7 FlashXCaptivateIQ Planning, Fullcast Plan alternatives: QuotaPath, Salesforce Sales Planning
MiniMax M2.5CaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: QuotaPath, Vena, Xactly
Muse Glimmer 30BCaptivateIQ Planning alternatives: QuotaPath
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.GPT-5.4 miniAnaplan Territory & Quota Planning alternatives: CaptivateIQ Planning, Vena
Gemini 3.5 FlashFullcast Plan alternatives: CaptivateIQ Planning, Pigment, Salesforce Maps, Salesforce Sales Planning, Xactly, Xactly AlignStar
GPT-6 LunaFullcast Plan alternatives: CaptivateIQ Planning, Salesforce Sales Planning
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
CaptivateIQ Planning leads by two points.
CaptivateIQ Planning5%#6 of 16Lative3%#8 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
CaptivateIQ Planning leads by forty-five points.
CaptivateIQ Planning47%#1 of 13Lative2%#7 of 13Enterprise
CaptivateIQ Planning leads by two points.
CaptivateIQ Planning4%#4 of 9Lative2%#– of 9What the models said about CaptivateIQ Planning
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“Avoid initially: CaptivateIQ, Fullcast, Anaplan, and Varicent.” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · hard negative
“Tools such as CaptivateIQ, QuotaPath, and similar products may calculate payouts well but can be lighter on territory design and scenario modeling.” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“look at fuller platforms like Fullcast or CaptivateIQ (though these are pricier)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“Best for: Mid-market to enterprise teams that want agility without heavy IT involvement ... Users consistently rate it higher than legacy tools” Kimi K2 · comparative prompt · first choice
“SPM suites like CaptivateIQ or Varicent often emerge as sweet spots because they unify territory, quota, and comp without overkill.” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · first choice
“Choose Fullcast or CaptivateIQ if you want territory + quota planning tightly aligned with compensation and governance workflows.” MiniMax M2.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
What the models said about Lative
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“Other options include Pigment, Lative, and Anaplan, but they may be more expensive or have more complex pricing structures.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · soft negative
“From $5,000/year (up to 20 reps) | Tying territory design directly to quota and rep capacity” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · soft negative
“Lative (from ~$5k/year but scalable)” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · soft negative
“CaptivateIQ Planning and Lative are the top choices” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
“Coverage-based planning around your reps, fast, affordable ($5K/yr) | If you need to start small and simple” DeepSeek V4 Flash · scale prompt · alternative
“Lative (~$5,000/yr) — it uniquely connects territory design to actual rep capacity and quota fairness” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · alternative
Also compared
CaptivateIQ Planning vs EverstageCaptivateIQ Planning vs Fullcast PlanCaptivateIQ Planning vs MaptiveCaptivateIQ Planning vs QuotaPathCaptivateIQ Planning vs Varicent Territory and Quota PlanningCaptivateIQ Planning vs Salesforce Sales PlanningEverstage vs LativeFullcast Plan vs LativeMaptive vs LativeQuotaPath vs LativeVaricent Territory and Quota Planning vs LativeLative vs Salesforce Sales PlanningAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full territory planning 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.