Index › HR › Compensation and total rewards › Compensation benchmarkin › Comprehensive.io vs Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
Compensation benchmarking data · November 2026 Edition
Comprehensive.io vs Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
One of fourteen models named Comprehensive.io first on the direct prompt; zero named Mercer Total Remuneration Survey. Comprehensive.io was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Mercer Total Remuneration Survey by fourteen and Comprehensive.io carries 15 labels and Mercer Total Remuneration Survey 34, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in three categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share9%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%50%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#6A position in a field of 9; printed, not drawn.
Labels1534A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Comprehensive.io reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Pave was named alongside these two in fourteen of the fourteen direct answers. Payscale vs Comprehensive.io · Payscale vs Mercer Total Remuneration Survey · Pave vs Comprehensive.io
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 compensation benchmarking data page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Comprehensive.ioFirst choices, of fourteen modelsMercer Total Remuneration Survey
Direct106 against Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
Paraphrase024 against Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
Comparative03
Budget-constrained402 against Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
Scale-constrained002 against Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
Negative003 against Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
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 Comprehensive.io and Mercer Total Remuneration Survey 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 | | | | |
Comprehensive.io Mercer Total Remuneration Survey first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Comprehensive.io on the left and Mercer Total Remuneration Survey on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Comprehensive.io and Mercer Total Remuneration Survey stood in it.
Comprehensive.io first, Mercer Total Remuneration Survey not the choice
1 of 14 modelsMercer Total Remuneration Survey was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Qwen 3.7 FlashComprehensive.io alternatives: Figures, Pave, Payscale, Salary.com CompAnalyst
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.Mistral SmallPave alternatives: Mercer Total Remuneration Survey, Payscale
Llama 4 MaverickSalaryCube alternatives: Mercer Total Remuneration Survey, Pave, Payscale
Kimi K2Payscale alternatives: Mercer Total Remuneration Survey, Pave, Radford, Salary.com CompAnalyst
Muse Glimmer 30BPayscale alternatives: CompAnalyst, Comprehensive.io, Pave, Salary.com CompAnalyst, SalaryCube
Neither was named
9 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Pave, SalaryCube alternatives: CompUp, OpenComp, Payscale Ascent
GPT-5.4 miniSalary.com CompAnalyst alternatives: Compensation-IQ, Pave, Payscale Ascent
Gemini 3.5 FlashPave alternatives: Carta Total Compensation, Payscale, Salary.com CompAnalyst
Perplexity SonarPayscale alternatives: Pave, Ravio, SalaryCube
Grok 4.20Payscale alternatives: Pave, Ravio, Salary.com CompAnalyst
DeepSeek V4 FlashPayscale alternatives: Mercer Benchmark Database, Pave, Ravio, SalaryCube
GLM 4.7 FlashXFigures, SalaryCube Comp Planning alternatives: Pave, Salary.com CompAnalyst
MiniMax M2.5CompAnalyst, Payscale alternatives: Pave
GPT-6 LunaPayscale alternatives: Pave
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
Comprehensive.io leads by seven points.
Comprehensive.io7%#4 of 10Mercer Total Remuneration Survey0%#9 of 10Mid-marketThe figures above
Comprehensive.io leads by five points.
Comprehensive.io9%#3 of 9Mercer Total Remuneration Survey4%#6 of 9Enterprise
The order flips: Mercer Total Remuneration Survey leads at enterprise.
Mercer Total Remuneration Survey33%#1 of 9Comprehensive.io0%#– of 9What the models said about Comprehensive.io
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“Pave's free Market Data Lite tier and Comprehensive's free salary data both give small teams real numbers at no cost” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Comprehensive.io - offers free, daily-refreshed tech salary data with no survey submission requirement.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
“The Top All-Rounder: Comprehensive.io ... frequently cited as the best fit for the mid-market segment” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Mercer Total Remuneration Survey
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Providers to avoid or use carefully include: - Mercer, Willis Towers Watson (WTW), and Radford when the budget is tight” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · hard negative
“avoid traditional enterprise survey providers (like Radford/Aon, Mercer, or Willis Towers Watson” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid for Mid-Market: Radford (Aon), Mercer, or Willis Towers Watson” Grok 4.20 · direct prompt · hard negative
“One of the most comprehensive and widely used surveys globally... Best for: Mid-sized companies seeking robust, benchmarked data” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Choose Mercer, WTW, Aon/Radford, or Korn Ferry for global compensation structures and job architecture.” Perplexity Sonar · comparative prompt · first choice
“If you need to set salary bands globally, choose Mercer for breadth.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared
Payscale vs Comprehensive.ioPayscale vs Mercer Total Remuneration SurveyPave vs Comprehensive.ioPave vs Mercer Total Remuneration SurveyComprehensive.io vs Salary.com CompAnalystComprehensive.io vs GlassdoorComprehensive.io vs RadfordComprehensive.io vs Willis Towers WatsonSalary.com CompAnalyst vs Mercer Total Remuneration SurveyGlassdoor vs Mercer Total Remuneration SurveyMercer Total Remuneration Survey vs RadfordMercer Total Remuneration Survey vs Willis Towers WatsonAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full compensation benchmarkin 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.