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 › HR › Onboarding and employee experience › Frontline employee apps › Deputy vs Workvivo
Frontline employee apps · November 2026 Edition

Deputy vs Workvivo

Zero of fourteen models named Deputy first on the direct prompt; one named Workvivo. Deputy was named by nine of the fourteen models and Workvivo by eight and Deputy carries 14 labels and Workvivo 10, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Deputy

accepted challenger

Named in nine categories this edition.

Workvivo

accepted challenger

Named in three categories this edition.

First-choice share2%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate7%20%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#7A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1410A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Deputy reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Connecteam was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Connecteam vs Deputy · Connecteam vs Workvivo · Beekeeper vs Deputy

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 frontline employee apps page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
DeputyFirst choices, of fourteen modelsWorkvivo
Direct01
Paraphrase10
Comparative00
Budget-constrained002 against Workvivo
Scale-constrained00
Negative001 against Deputy
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 Deputy and Workvivo 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
Deputy Workvivo first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Deputy on the left and Workvivo on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Workvivo first, Deputy not the choice

1 of 14 modelsDeputy was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GPT-5.4 miniWorkvivo alternatives: Blink, Staffbase, WorkJam

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.
Claude Haiku 4.5Connecteam alternatives: Blink, Speakap, Workvivo

Neither was named

12 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Gemini 3.5 FlashBeekeeper, Connecteam alternatives: Blink, Microsoft 365 for Frontline Workers, Yourco, Zello
Perplexity SonarConnecteam alternatives: Beekeeper, Blink, Microsoft 365 for Frontline Workers, Staffbase
Grok 4.20Connecteam alternatives: Beekeeper, Blink, Staffbase, WorkJam
Mistral SmallBeekeeper, Connecteam alternatives: Blink, Staffbase
DeepSeek V4 FlashConnecteam alternatives: Beekeeper, Blink
Llama 4 MaverickBeekeeper alternatives: Connecteam, Staffbase
Qwen 3.7 FlashConnecteam alternatives: Blink, MangoApps, Microsoft 365 for Frontline Workers
Kimi K2Connecteam alternatives: Blink
GLM 4.7 FlashXBeekeeper alternatives: Blink, Connecteam, Staffbase
MiniMax M2.5Blink alternatives: Beekeeper, Connecteam, Staffbase
GPT-6 LunaBlink alternatives: Connecteam, Staffbase
Muse Glimmer 30BBeekeeper, Blink, LumApps alternatives: Connecteam, MangoApps, Staffbase

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
Level: the same share of first choices.
Deputy0%#8 of 11
Workvivo0%#– of 11
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Deputy2%#5 of 13
Workvivo2%#7 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Deputy0%#– of 13
Workvivo0%#9 of 13
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Deputy

No label in this category carried a quote.

What the models said about Workvivo

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

“Avoid enterprise-focused tools like Staffbase or Workvivo, which are significantly more expensive” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
Also compared
Connecteam vs DeputyConnecteam vs WorkvivoBeekeeper vs DeputyBeekeeper vs WorkvivoBlink vs DeputyBlink vs WorkvivoPebb vs DeputyPebb vs WorkvivoDeputy vs MangoAppsMangoApps vs WorkvivoAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full frontline employee apps 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.