How we compare sales gamification software
We publish comparisons that include our own product, which creates an obvious conflict of interest. These are the rules we hold ourselves to so the pages stay worth reading anyway: only primary sources, every figure dated, our product always labelled, segment rankings rather than a single ordered list, and nothing published that we could not show you the source for.
What counts as a source
A figure gets published only if it appears in the vendor's own material: a pricing page, a knowledge base, published documentation or a press release. Where a vendor publishes nothing — as with a platform that runs no pricing page at all — we record the absence as a fact rather than substituting an estimate.
We do not carry figures over from third-party comparison sites, because in this category they are frequently stale. One vendor's prices are injected by JavaScript rather than served in the HTML, and directory listings for it still republish a price book the vendor has since retired.
Where a vendor's own pages disagree with each other, we say so and publish both figures rather than picking the more flattering one. That has happened more than once across the 7 platforms tracked.
What we will not publish
- Unverified competitor claims about each other. Vendors make assertions about rivals' contract minimums and implementation timelines on their own comparison pages. We do not repeat those unless we can source them independently.
- Review quotes and award badges we have not verified. Review-site aggregate scores move, and some are gated from direct checking.
- Invented proof of any kind. No customer names, logos, testimonials, case-study numbers, review counts, certifications or funding figures that we do not hold. We emit no
AggregateRatingstructured data, because we have no genuine review corpus to base it on. - Statistics with broken citation chains. If a widely-repeated figure traces back through three intermediaries to a source nobody can produce, we leave it out and make the point without it.
How we handle our own product
Sales Gamification appears in every ranking and comparison on this site, and is labelled as ours everywhere it appears. It is ranked first for one segment — teams that want the programme designed rather than configured — because that is the thing it does that the others do not. It is not ranked first for enterprise coaching, for cross-department dashboards or for physical-floor recognition, because it is not the best answer there and saying otherwise would make the whole page worthless.
Every comparison page carries a “choose them if” section written in good faith. If you read one and think the case for the competitor is too thin, that is a bug — tell us.
Why rankings are by segment
A six-rep team and a 300-rep revenue organisation are not shopping for the same product, so a single ordered list would be wrong for almost everyone reading it. Rankings are organised by the situation the buyer is actually in, and the pricing maths is shown at several team sizes because the answer genuinely changes with headcount.
How often this is refreshed
All figures currently carry a verification date of 24 July 2026. Pricing in this category moves — one vendor was running a limited-time discount at the point we checked, and another had changed from quote-only to published pricing since most third-party summaries were written. We re-verify quarterly and after any vendor pricing announcement we notice.
The full dataset is published at the Pricing Index, with every source linked. If a figure is wrong or out of date, tell us and it gets corrected with the date of the change recorded.
Frequently asked questions
Do you take affiliate commission from the vendors you compare?+
No. There are no affiliate links, referral fees or paid placements anywhere on this site. Our commercial interest is our own product, which is disclosed on every page it appears on.
Why does your own product appear in your rankings?+
Leaving it out would be its own kind of dishonesty — a comparison of the category that silently omits one platform is not a comparison of the category. Including it with a clear label, and ranking it only for the segment where it genuinely wins, is the more useful version.
How do you decide what a vendor is best for?+
From what the vendor does better than the others, not from what we would prefer to be true. That is why the deepest coaching workflow, the cross-department dashboard capability and the physical-floor recognition strengths are all attributed to competitors on our rankings page.
What if a vendor disputes a figure?+
Send us the published source and we will correct it, with the change and its date recorded on the page. Every figure we publish links to where we read it, so disputes are usually quick to settle.
Design your program in about four minutes
Blueprint reads how your team sells, weights the scoring model, calibrates for fairness and hands you a competition ready to launch. No demo call, no card.
Flat team pricing · No seat minimums · Cancel anytime