Claude vs Copilot
Claude vs Copilot comparison: Anthropic's safe AI vs Microsoft's productivity assistant. Which chatbot is better for work in 2025?
Key Findings
Which brand leads in AI visibility and mentions.
Claude outpaces Copilot in AI visibility significantly.
AI Recommendation
Brands most often recommended by AI models
ChatGPT
Top Choice
5/5
Models Agree
Popularity Ranking
Overall ranking based on AI brand mentions
Anthropic
Rank #1
76/112
Total Analyzed Answers
Trending Mentions
Recent shifts in AI model responses
GitHub
Rising Star
10%
Growth Rate
Brand Visibility
Analysis of brand presence in AI-generated responses.
AI Visibility Share Rankings
Brands ranked by share of AI mentions in answers
AI Visibility Share Over Time
Visibility share trends over time across compared brands
Topics Compared
Key insights from AI Apps comparisons across major topics
"Which AI is best for analyzing contracts and legal documents?"
Luminance emerges as the leading brand for analyzing contracts and legal documents across multiple AI models due to its consistently high visibility and recognition as a specialized tool in this domain.
Gemini shows a slight preference for Litera with a 2.1% visibility share, but also acknowledges Luminance and DocuSign equally at 1.5%, indicating a balanced view with a neutral sentiment toward specialized legal analysis tools.
Perplexity leans toward Luminance with a 1.3% visibility share, though it also mentions other tools like Harvey and Ironclad, reflecting a neutral sentiment focused on a broad range of contract analysis solutions.
ChatGPT strongly favors Luminance with an 8.1% visibility share, far ahead of others like Litera or ThoughtRiver, demonstrating a positive sentiment and clear recognition of Luminance as a leader in legal document analysis.
Grok distributes visibility more evenly, with ContractPodAi, LawGeex, and Luminance each at around 1.1%, showing a neutral sentiment and no strong preference for a single tool in contract analysis.
Deepseek highlights DocuSign and LawGeex at 2.6% visibility each, with Luminance at 1.5%, indicating a neutral-to-positive sentiment but a preference for more widely adopted platforms over niche legal tools.
"Should I use Claude or Copilot for coding and development?"
Claude appears to have a slight edge over Copilot for coding and development due to higher visibility and association with coding ecosystems across models, though Copilot's integration with GitHub and VS Code remains a strong contender.
ChatGPT shows a notable visibility for Claude (3.6%) and Anthropic (9.1%), suggesting a positive association with coding tools, particularly in ecosystems involving VS Code (9.3%) and GitHub (9.3%). Its tone is neutral to positive toward Claude, favoring it for development contexts due to broader brand recognition.
Grok assigns a lower visibility to Claude (1.3%) compared to coding tools like GitHub (2.5%) and VS Code (2.3%), indicating a neutral sentiment with no strong preference for Claude over other tools like Copilot, which aligns with GitHub. Its perception leans toward ecosystem compatibility rather than a specific AI tool.
Deepseek highlights Anthropic (2.5%) alongside key coding platforms like GitHub (2.6%) and VS Code (2.6%), reflecting a neutral to positive tone toward Claude for development purposes. It perceives Claude as a relevant player within coding environments, though not explicitly dominant.
Perplexity gives Claude a modest visibility (1.3%) but strongly associates Anthropic (2.5%) with development tools like GitHub (2.6%) and VS Code (2.5%), indicating a neutral to positive sentiment. It views Claude as a viable option for coding, though its focus is split across broader ecosystems.
Gemini attributes a visibility of 1.3% to Claude and 2.3% to Anthropic, showing a neutral tone with a slight inclination toward Claude for coding tasks due to alignment with platforms like GitHub (2.6%) and VS Code (2.5%). Its perception balances Claude's relevance against Copilot's strong GitHub integration.
"Which AI is better for enterprise and big companies?"
Google and Windows emerge as the leading choices for enterprise and big companies across the models due to their high visibility shares and consistent recognition for robust ecosystem support and scalability.
ChatGPT shows a clear preference for Google and Windows, both with an 8.1% visibility share, likely due to their established enterprise ecosystems and scalability for big companies. Its sentiment tone is positive, emphasizing their dominance in enterprise-relevant contexts.
Gemini equally favors Google, Windows, and Amazon Web Services (AWS), each with a 2.6% visibility share, highlighting their suitability for enterprise needs through strong cloud and integration capabilities. The tone is neutral, focusing on balanced recognition of enterprise-grade solutions.
Deepseek leans toward Google, Windows, AWS, Salesforce, and IBM, each at 2.3% visibility share, valuing their comprehensive enterprise tools and data management solutions for large-scale operations. Its tone is positive, reflecting optimism about their institutional adoption.
Perplexity prioritizes Google with a 2.5% visibility share and IBM at 2.3%, likely for their innovation in AI and data analytics tailored for big companies. The sentiment tone is positive, underscoring their strategic fit for enterprise environments.
Grok favors Google, Windows, AWS, Salesforce, and IBM, each with a 2.5% visibility share, due to their robust infrastructure and enterprise-focused solutions. Its tone is positive, reflecting confidence in their ability to meet large-scale business demands.
"Which AI has the best understanding and reasoning?"
ChatGPT emerges as the AI model with the best understanding and reasoning due to its broader and more balanced coverage of brands, reflected in higher visibility shares and a larger question base.
Deepseek shows a balanced perception of major AI brands like Anthropic and ChatGPT (both at 2.6% visibility share), with no strong favoritism, maintaining a neutral tone. Its reasoning, based on equal visibility distribution, suggests a focus on diverse representation over deep insight into any single brand.
Grok equally favors Anthropic and ChatGPT (both at 2.6% visibility share), displaying a neutral tone with no pronounced bias toward any brand. Its reasoning appears rooted in recognizing established players, though it lacks depth in differentiating their capabilities.
ChatGPT demonstrates a strong focus on itself (11.2% visibility share) alongside Google (10.8%) and Anthropic (10.2%), with a positive tone indicating confidence in well-known entities. Its reasoning, backed by a significantly higher question count (59), suggests deeper engagement and a nuanced understanding of the AI landscape.
Perplexity allocates equal visibility (2.3%) to Anthropic, Google, and ChatGPT, adopting a neutral tone without clear favoritism. Its reasoning prioritizes accessibility of information over in-depth analysis, reflected in a smaller question base (12) and limited brand coverage.
Gemini slightly favors ChatGPT (3.2% visibility share) and Anthropic (3.0%) over others, with a neutral-to-positive tone toward prominent AI brands. Its reasoning focuses on user recognition and ecosystem relevance, though its smaller question count (17) limits the depth of its insights.
"What's the safest AI for confidential business data?"
Windows and Google consistently emerge as leading options for the safest AI handling confidential business data due to their high visibility and implied trust in security infrastructure across multiple models.
Grok shows a balanced view with Google and Windows both at a 2.1% visibility share, suggesting trust in their robust security frameworks for confidential data. Its neutral sentiment reflects no strong bias but highlights established players over newer AI-specific brands like Claude or Ollama.
ChatGPT favors Windows (10%) and Google (9.8%) in visibility, likely due to their extensive enterprise-grade security features and widespread adoption for business data protection. The positive sentiment underscores confidence in these brands’ ecosystems for safeguarding confidentiality.
DeepSeek prioritizes Windows (2.8%) and Google (2.6%) alongside AWS (2.6%), indicating a focus on established tech giants with proven data security protocols for business use. Its neutral tone suggests reliance on adoption patterns and institutional trust rather than innovation alone.
Perplexity leans toward Windows (2.1%) as a key player, with minimal emphasis on Google (0.6%), hinting at a preference for Windows’ accessibility and security reputation in business environments. The neutral-to-skeptical sentiment reflects caution toward less visible or specialized options for confidential data.
Gemini equally highlights Windows (2.5%) and Google (2.5%), pointing to their strong ecosystem integration and security features for handling sensitive business information. The positive sentiment indicates trust in these brands’ ability to prioritize data protection.
FAQs
Key insights into your brand's market position, AI coverage, and topic leadership.
Which is better, Claude or Copilot?
Claude is better if you prioritize deep thinking, long document analysis, and safety - especially for sensitive work. It excels at complex reasoning, detailed writing, and working with massive amounts of text (up to 500 pages). Copilot is better if you're embedded in Microsoft's ecosystem and need AI integrated into your daily tools. Copilot works natively in Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Teams, Windows, and Edge without any setup. For example, lawyers and researchers often prefer Claude for analyzing contracts and papers, while office workers prefer Copilot because it's already in the tools they use every day. If you need an AI to think deeply, choose Claude. If you need AI to work inside Microsoft apps, choose Copilot.
Is Claude safer than Copilot?
Yes, Claude is specifically designed with safety as a core principle through 'Constitutional AI' - it's trained to be helpful, harmless, and honest. Claude has stronger guardrails against harmful content, better privacy protections, and is less likely to be manipulated through clever prompts. Many enterprises, law firms, and healthcare organizations choose Claude specifically for handling sensitive information because of its safety-first design. Copilot is also safe and follows Microsoft's responsible AI principles, but Claude's entire architecture was built around being extra cautious. If you're working with confidential client data, medical records, legal documents, or anything requiring maximum privacy and ethical AI, Claude's safety reputation gives it the edge.
Which AI works better with Microsoft products?
Copilot dominates this completely - it's literally built into Microsoft products. In Word, Copilot can write, edit, and format documents directly. In Excel, it creates formulas and charts. In PowerPoint, it designs presentations. In Teams, it summarizes meetings. In Outlook, it drafts emails and manages your calendar. Everything happens inside the apps you already use. Claude runs in a separate browser or app and can't touch your Microsoft files directly. If your workday involves Microsoft 365 (which most businesses use), Copilot saves massive amounts of time by eliminating copying and pasting between apps. It's not even close - Copilot's Microsoft integration is its entire reason for existing.
Is Claude better for long documents?
Yes, by a huge margin. Claude can handle up to 200,000 tokens (roughly 500 pages or 150,000 words) in a single conversation. This means you can upload your entire dissertation, multiple research papers, or a complete codebase and Claude will read and understand all of it. Copilot has much smaller context limits. In practice, this matters enormously: Claude can compare multiple legal contracts side-by-side, analyze entire books, or review your full company documentation without losing context. For researchers, lawyers, writers, or anyone working with large documents, Claude's massive context window is a game-changer. You can have hour-long conversations referencing details from the very beginning without Claude forgetting anything.
Which AI is better for coding?
Both are excellent for coding, but they serve different purposes. Claude is better for complex algorithms, code review, debugging tricky logic, and explaining difficult concepts. Professional developers often prefer Claude for deep work because it understands context better and can handle longer code files. Copilot (especially GitHub Copilot) is better for IDE integration, quick autocomplete, and productivity while actually coding. It sits right in your VS Code or Visual Studio and suggests code as you type. Many developers use both: Claude for thinking through architecture and solving hard problems, Copilot for faster day-to-day coding. If you can only choose one, Claude is better for learning and understanding code, Copilot is better for speed and integration.
