Every category where a model named HaloITSM for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
IT service management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	8 of 48	7%	15	accepted challenger
IT asset management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	35 of 61	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Snipe-IT at 24%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for HaloITSM yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated HaloITSM across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	3	0	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	1	2	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	3	1	0	4
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	3	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct5 labelsNone

Paraphrase7 labelsNone

Comparative8 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labels2

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative5 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative32 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 3 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Rapidly gaining popularity for delivering enterprise-level features ... with highly customizable, all-inclusive mid-market pricing” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ITSM · scale prompt · alternative

“if you care most about usability and transparent pricing; PCMag names it an Editors' Choice pick” Perplexity Sonar · ITSM · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“tools like Halo and Hornbill offer strong foundations with lower implementation overhead” Claude Haiku 4.5 · ITSM · comparative prompt · alternative

“requires robust ITIL compliance and deep B2B client account tracking... HaloITSM” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ITSM · direct prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“~$66/agent/month | More expensive, but includes all modules; better for larger SMBs” GLM 4.7 FlashX · ITSM · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as HaloITSM, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HaloITSM was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Freshservice29 of 3215Not in the top three

Jira Service Management27 of 324Not in the top three

ServiceNow20 of 323Not in the top three

ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus17 of 320Not in the top three

Zendesk12 of 320Not in the top three

BMC Helix ITSM10 of 320Not in the top three

Ivanti Neurons for ITSM10 of 320Not in the top three

InvGate Service Management9 of 320Not in the top three

SolarWinds Service Desk7 of 320Not in the top three

SysAid7 of 320Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named HaloITSM. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 26 of the 32 answers that named HaloITSM and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

blog.invgate.com15

gartner.com13

motadata.com13

guideflow.com10

virima.com10

alloysoftware.com9

console.com8

expertinsights.com8

xurrent.com8

eesel.ai7

101 of the 101 domain citations in answers naming HaloITSM came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/it-service-management-platforms12

guideflow.com/blog/it-service-management-tools10

alloysoftware.com/blog/best-itsm-platforms-for-small-business7

console.com/blog/best-itsm-tools7

motadata.com/blog/best-itsm-tools7

blog.invgate.com/best-itsm-tools6

eesel.ai/blog/itsm-for-smb6

expertinsights.com/it-management/the-top-it-service-management-itsm-solutions6

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as HaloITSM

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as HaloITSM; a claim can dispute any of them.

Halo 2

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when HaloITSM's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as HaloITSM, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at haloitsm.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.