Index › HR › Compensation and total rewards › 401(k) providers › Fidelity Workplace Investing vs Guideline
401(k) providers · November 2026 Edition
Fidelity Workplace Investing vs Guideline
Four of fourteen models named Fidelity Workplace Investing first on the direct prompt; zero named Guideline. Fidelity Workplace Investing was named by ten of the fourteen models and Guideline by twelve and Fidelity Workplace Investing carries 17 labels and Guideline 25, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Fidelity Workplace Investing
accepted challengerNamed in one category this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share16%10%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%4%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#3A position in a field of 18; printed, not drawn.
Labels1725A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Fidelity Workplace Investing reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Human Interest was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Human Interest vs Fidelity Workplace Investing · Human Interest vs Guideline · Fidelity Workplace Investing vs ADP Retirement Services
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 401(k) providers page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Fidelity Workplace InvestingFirst choices, of fourteen modelsGuideline
Direct40
Paraphrase41
Comparative01
Budget-constrained04
Scale-constrained00
Negative001 against Guideline
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 Fidelity Workplace Investing and Guideline stood in it.
| Model | DirectFW | ParaphraseFW | ComparativeFW | Budget-constrainedFW | Scale-constrainedFW | NegativeFW |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | |||
| Perplexity Sonar | FW | |||||
| Grok 4.20 | FW | | ||||
| Mistral Small | | |||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | FW | | | |||
| Llama 4 Maverick | FW | FW | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | FW | | | |||
| Kimi K2 | FW | FW | | |||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | FW | FW | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | FW | FW | | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | FW | |||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | FW | FW | |
FW Fidelity Workplace Investing GuidelineFW first choiceFW named as an alternativeFW argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Fidelity Workplace Investing on the left and Guideline on the right.
GuidelineFW first choiceFW named as an alternativeFW argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Fidelity Workplace Investing on the left and Guideline on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Fidelity Workplace Investing and Guideline stood in it.
Fidelity Workplace Investing first, Guideline not the choice
4 of 14 modelsGuideline was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Perplexity SonarFidelity Workplace Investing alternatives: Betterment at Work, Human Interest
Qwen 3.7 FlashFidelity Workplace Investing, Human Interest alternatives: Empower Retirement, Vanguard Workplace Solutions
Kimi K2Fidelity Workplace Investing, Human Interest alternatives: Betterment at Work, Empower Retirement, ForUsAll, Vanguard Workplace Solutions, Vestwell
Muse Glimmer 30BEmpower Retirement, Fidelity Workplace Investing alternatives: ADP Retirement Services, Betterment at Work, Human Interest, Paychex Retirement Services, Vanguard Workplace Solutions
Neither was the first choice, one was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniEmpower Retirement alternatives: ADP Retirement Services, Guideline, Gusto Retirement, Human Interest
Grok 4.20Human Interest alternatives: ADP Retirement Services, Betterment at Work, Fidelity Workplace Investing, Guideline, Vestwell
Mistral SmallADP Retirement Services, Empower Retirement, Fidelity Advantage 401, Vanguard Workplace Solutions alternatives: ForUsAll, Guideline, Human Interest, Paychex Retirement Services, Vestwell
GLM 4.7 FlashXBetterment for Business, Human Interest alternatives: ADP Retirement Services, Empower Retirement, Fidelity Workplace Investing, Vanguard Workplace Solutions
MiniMax M2.5Human Interest alternatives: Betterment at Work, Fidelity Workplace Investing
Neither was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
Gemini 3.5 FlashFidelity Investments alternatives: ADP Retirement Services, Empower Retirement, Principal Financial Group
DeepSeek V4 FlashHuman Interest alternatives: Empower Retirement, Fidelity Advantage 401
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
GPT-6 LunaEmpower Retirement, Fidelity Advantage 401 alternatives: ADP Retirement Services, Principal
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
Guideline leads by twenty-five points.
Guideline25%#1 of 11Fidelity Workplace Investing0%#– of 11
The full small business standing →Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Fidelity Workplace Investing leads at mid-market.
Fidelity Workplace Investing16%#2 of 18
Guideline10%#3 of 18Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Fidelity Workplace Investing2%#– of 11
Guideline2%#– of 11What the models said about Fidelity Workplace Investing
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“I'd put Fidelity Workplace Investing first on the RFP shortlist—not award the contract without comparing bids.” GPT-6 Luna · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Fidelity Workplace Investing is a safe, well-supported default for scale and fiduciary resources” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Scale / investment choice + fiduciary support: Fidelity Workplace Investing, Empower Retirement” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Guideline
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“execution and service seem unreliable—avoid if you value responsive support.” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Guideline is frequently ranked first for cost/automation, with $89 base + $8/employee in current provider listings, and no setup fee.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“Choose a Tech-Forward Provider (Guideline, Human Interest, Betterment) if you have under 50 employees” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Guideline looks like the strongest low-budget option for many small businesses” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
Human Interest vs Fidelity Workplace InvestingHuman Interest vs GuidelineFidelity Workplace Investing vs ADP Retirement ServicesFidelity Workplace Investing vs Empower RetirementFidelity Workplace Investing vs Fidelity Advantage 401Fidelity Workplace Investing vs Employee Fiduciary 401(k) PlanFidelity Workplace Investing vs Fidelity InvestmentsGuideline vs ADP Retirement ServicesGuideline vs Empower RetirementGuideline vs Fidelity Advantage 401Guideline vs Employee Fiduciary 401(k) PlanGuideline vs Fidelity InvestmentsAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full 401(k) providers 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.