Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Classroom Assessment Platforms

Tools used by teachers to create formative and summative assessments, collect student responses, and analyze performance data.

Brands tracked: 39
Brands analyzed: 39
Last updated: 2026-04-23
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 294
Total responses: 1,530
Top Brand Overall?
Kahoot!
72/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Quizizz
85

Highest score on the LBA metric in this industry.

Authority Leader?
Kahoot!
52

Highest score on the Authority metric in this industry.

TOM Leader?
Google
93

Highest score on the TOM metric in this industry.

Kahoot! leads the Classroom Assessment Platforms category in AI responses

Kahoot! is the most consistently-surfaced brand when users ask AI assistants about Classroom Assessment Platforms, but not to the point of monopolising the conversation. Quizizz and a handful of others appear regularly, giving users a reasonable set of alternatives to compare. The top of this leaderboard is where most of the AI-driven traffic will go.

Brand Leaderboard All 39 Classroom Assessment Platforms brands ranked

Ranked by overall AI Visibility Score (smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority, and TOM with an LBA-based floor on Authority and TOM, see methodology). Click any brand for the full report.

# Brand LBA Authority TOM Overall
1
Kahoot!
kahoot.com
 78
52
92
72
2
Quizizz
quizizz.com
 85
47
89
71
3
Google
google.com
 75
43
93
67
4
Nearpod
nearpod.com
 80
48
78
67
5
Formative
goformative.com
 72
50
70
64
6
Socrative
socrative.com
 69
18
50
40
7
Pear Deck
peardeck.com
 79
13
36
35
8
Canvas
canvaslms.com
 72
9
44
32
9
Microsoft
microsoft.com
 78
8
42
32
10
Edpuzzle
edpuzzle.com
 68
7
38
28
11
Schoology
schoology.com
 66
7
33
27
12
Blooket
blooket.com
 70
7
19
23
13
MentiMeter
mentimeter.com
 77
8
14
22
14
Canvas LMS
instructure.com
 84
8
8
20
15
Classkick
classkick.com
 63
6
16
20
16
Edulastic
edulastic.com
 61
6
17
20
17
NWEA
nwea.org
 74
7
10
20
18
CommonLit
commonlit.org
 75
8
8
18
19
Gimkit
gimkit.com
 75
7
7
18
20
MasteryConnect
masteryconnect.com
 63
6
10
18
21
Plickers
plickers.com
 67
7
9
18
22
Renaissance
renlearn.com
 71
7
9
18
23
Newsela
newsela.com
 69
7
7
17
24
Illuminate Education
illuminateed.com
 66
7
7
16
25
P
Pear Assessment
pearassessment.com
 43
4
17
16
26
Otus
otus.com
 54
5
5
14
27
Questionmark
questionmark.com
 55
6
6
14
28
ZipGrade
zipgrade.com
 56
6
6
14
29
Exam.net
exam.net
 50
5
5
13
30
Classtime
classtime.com
 49
5
5
12
31
T
TAO
tao.testing
 46
5
5
12
32
FastBridge
fastbridge.org
 44
4
4
11
33
Edcite
edcite.com
 37
4
4
10
34
Akindi
akindi.com
 30
3
3
8
35
SchoolCity
schoolcity.com
 29
3
3
8
36
Testmoz
testmoz.com
 31
3
3
8
37
Y
YaClass
yaclass.net
 22
2
2
6
38
Conker
conker.ai
 14
1
1
4
39
AssessPrep
assessprep.com
 0
0
0
0

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 294 shared Classroom Assessment Platforms prompts. The same prompts, same model, same iterations. So differences in scores reflect actual differences in AI visibility, not differences in measurement.

Overall AI Visibility Score
Smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority and TOM. Authority and TOM are floored at LBA × 0.1 before the geometric mean (the same floor used in the per-metric cards above, so brand cards and the composite tell the same story). Formula: composite = ((LBA + 5)(Authority + 5)(TOM + 5))^(1/3) - 5. The floor keeps brands the model clearly recognises but doesn't yet recommend from collapsing to zero, while a single genuinely weak metric still pulls the composite down. Full methodology.
Shared industry prompts
For Authority and TOM, all brands in the industry are scored against the same 294 category prompts (e.g. "best SEO tools for agencies"). This makes brand-to-brand comparisons valid - everyone faces identical inputs. LBA prompts are per-brand because they ask brand-specific questions.
Latent Brand Association (LBA)
5 brand probes + 1 control prompt, each run 5 times in recall mode (no web search). LBA = quality × meta × stability × share × recognition × 100. Read the full LBA methodology →
LLM Authority
50 organic category prompts (discovery, comparison, problem and transactional intents), each run once in recall mode and once in retrieval mode. Score = frequency × log-decayed prominence × intent weight, then 50/50 averaged across the two modes. Read the full Authority methodology →
Top of Mind (TOM)
15 high-volume discovery prompts (sourced from Keywords Everywhere search-volume data), each run 5 times in pure recall mode (no web). Score = frequency × (0.5 + 0.5 × log-prominence), volume-weighted. Read the full TOM methodology →