Research & Analysis · Weakest Dimension

Research & Analysis: Weakest Dimension (2026)

Each Research & Analysis tool's lowest recorded dimension among the five rubric axes, plus how often each dimension lands at the bottom across the channel (56 tools). Ties are resolved to the earlier rubric axis (quality → features → usability → performance → value) and disclosed here.

Weakest-Dimension Census

Number of tools whose minimum recorded dimension falls on each axis.

Output Quality

3 tool(s)

Feature Depth

24 tool(s)

Usability

4 tool(s)

Performance

5 tool(s)

Value for Money

20 tool(s)

Per-Tool Weakest Dimension (Recorded)

Tool	Weakest dimension	Value	Overall
ChatGPT	Performance	86	90.9
Claude	Value for Money	84	88.9
Gemini	Performance	85	88.5
Perplexity	Value for Money	85	88.4
Semantic Scholar	Feature Depth	82	87.5
Poe	Performance	84	87.1
OpenAlex	Usability	82	87.0
DeepWiki	Feature Depth	76	85.4
NotebookLM	Feature Depth	78	85.2
Elicit	Value for Money	78	84.8
DeepSeek	Feature Depth	80	84.7
Metaso	Feature Depth	78	84.5
Tavily	Value for Money	82	84.5
STORM	Feature Depth	78	84.4
Firecrawl	Value for Money	78	84.2
Paperguide	Performance	82	84.1
Kagi Assistant	Value for Money	78	83.9
Qwen Chat	Feature Depth	82	83.7
SciSpace	Feature Depth	82	83.5
Exa	Usability	78	83.2
SciSummary	Feature Depth	74	83.2
Phind	Feature Depth	76	82.8
Undermind	Value for Money	76	82.6
Doubao	Output Quality	78	82.2
ResearchRabbit	Feature Depth	78	82.1
ERNIE Bot	Feature Depth	76	81.5
ChatGLM	Feature Depth	76	81.5
Microsoft Copilot	Output Quality	80	81.4
Kimi	Value for Money	78	81.3
Komo	Feature Depth	76	81.3
Genspark	Performance	79	80.9
AnswerThis	Value for Money	72	80.8
Le Chat	Feature Depth	80	80.8
You.com	Value for Money	76	80.8
Grok	Value for Money	74	80.5
AlphaSense	Value for Money	62	80.3
Litmaps API	Feature Depth	76	80.3
Brave Search API	Usability	78	80.2
Litmaps	Feature Depth	78	80.2
Researcher.Life	Value for Money	78	79.9
Unusual Whales	Value for Money	70	79.9
Inciteful	Feature Depth	72	79.7
Quartr	Value for Money	68	79.7
Scite	Value for Money	70	79.7
Keenious	Feature Depth	74	79.6
HuggingChat	Feature Depth	72	79.3
Morphic	Feature Depth	72	78.6
Otio	Output Quality	78	78.6
Andi	Feature Depth	66	77.9
Consensus	Value for Money	72	77.8
Connected Papers	Feature Depth	72	77.7
MiniMax	Value for Money	76	77.6
Scholarcy	Feature Depth	74	77.4
Paperpal	Value for Money	74	77.1
Perplexica (Vane)	Usability	70	77.0
Fintool	Value for Money	68	73.6

Comparisons hub → Deterministic rankings → All insights → Research & Analysis channel →

Methodology — all figures are computed on this page from the published archives only (data/tools, 56 recorded research tools, snapshots 2026-09-06 – 2026-09-17). Medians use the standard median (middle element, or the mean of the two middle elements rounded to one decimal); means are arithmetic averages rounded to one decimal. A low dimension marks a recorded rubric minimum, not a product defect. No figure on this page is sampled, estimated or sponsored.