Workforce planning · November 2026 Edition
Planful vs Connecteam
Zero of fourteen models named Planful first on the direct prompt; zero named Connecteam. Planful was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Connecteam by ten and Planful carries 31 labels and Connecteam 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in eighteen categories this edition.
First-choice share4%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%8%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#6#8A position in a field of 20; printed, not drawn.
Labels3113A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Planful reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.ChartHop was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. ChartHop vs Planful · ChartHop vs Connecteam · Pigment vs Planful
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 workforce 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.
PlanfulFirst choices, of fourteen modelsConnecteam
Direct00
Paraphrase20
Comparative001 against Connecteam
Budget-constrained02
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 Planful and Connecteam 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 | | | | |
Planful Connecteam first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Planful on the left and Connecteam on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Planful and Connecteam stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
10 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5ChartHop, Paylocity alternatives: HiBob, Planful, Rippling, Vena, Visier Workforce Planning
Gemini 3.5 FlashChartHop, Pigment, TeamOhana alternatives: Cube, Planful, Vena, Workday Adaptive Planning
Perplexity SonarChartHop alternatives: HiBob, Planful, Runn, Saviom, TeamOhana
Mistral SmallDisprz alternatives: ChartHop, Orgvue, Planful
DeepSeek V4 FlashChartHop alternatives: Pigment, Planful, TeamOhana, Workday Adaptive Planning
Qwen 3.7 FlashChartHop alternatives: 4PLAN HR, Abacum, Deel Workforce Planning, Monday.com, Planful, Rotageek, Visier Workforce Planning, Workday Adaptive Planning
Kimi K2ChartHop alternatives: 4PLAN HR, Abacum, Dayforce, Planful, TeamOhana, UKG Pro Workforce Management
MiniMax M2.5Disprz alternatives: ChartHop, HiBob, Orgvue, Planful, TeamOhana
GPT-6 LunaPigment alternatives: Adaptive from Workday, Planful, TeamOhana
Muse Glimmer 30BChartHop alternatives: 4PLAN HR, Centage, Disprz, Orgvue, Planful, Prophix, Vena
Neither was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniWorkday Adaptive Planning alternatives: Anaplan, HiBob, Rippling
Grok 4.20ChartHop alternatives: Anaplan, Rippling, Visier Workforce Planning
Llama 4 MaverickChartHop alternatives: Vena
GLM 4.7 FlashXChartHop alternatives: 4PLAN HR, Dayforce, UKG Pro Workforce Management, Visier Workforce 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
Connecteam leads by eleven points.
Connecteam11%#5 of 15Planful0%#– of 15Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Planful4%#6 of 20Connecteam4%#8 of 20Enterprise
Connecteam is not named for this buyer.
Planful0%#10 of 14Connecteam—not namedWhat the models said about Planful
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“For most mid-sized B2B companies, Planful, Abacum, or ChartHop are the best starting points” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For a typical growing B2B company, Planful is usually the strongest choice.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“A strong alternative if you want workforce planning as part of a more finance-led budgeting and forecasting suite” GPT-6 Luna · direct prompt · alternative
What the models said about Connecteam
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“Not a strategic planning tool.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · comparative prompt · soft negative
“I'd recommend starting with Connecteam's free plan if you have 10 or fewer employees, as it offers the most comprehensive feature set at no cost.” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
ChartHop vs PlanfulChartHop vs ConnecteamPigment vs PlanfulPigment vs ConnecteamHomebase vs PlanfulHomebase vs ConnecteamTeamOhana vs PlanfulTeamOhana vs Connecteam4PLAN HR vs Planful4PLAN HR vs ConnecteamPlanful vs Workday Adaptive PlanningWorkday Adaptive Planning vs ConnecteamAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full workforce 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.