Finance AI Index
Index › Equity and corporate › Cap table management › Carta vs Qapita
Cap table management · September 2026 Edition

Carta vs Qapita

Eleven of twelve models named Carta first on the direct prompt; four named Qapita. Carta was named by twelve of the twelve models and Qapita by eleven and Carta carries 65 labels and Qapita 26, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Carta

endorsed leader

Named in three categories this edition.

Qapita

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share44%14%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate22%4%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#2A position in a field of 8; printed, not drawn.
Labels6526A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Carta reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Pulley was named alongside these two in seven of the twelve direct answers. Carta vs Eqvista · Qapita vs Eqvista

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the cap table management page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
CartaFirst choices, of twelve modelsQapita
Direct1141 against Carta
Paraphrase631 against Qapita
Comparative120
Budget-constrained403 against Carta
Scale-constrained51
Negative0010 against Carta
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Carta and Qapita stood in it.

Both were the first choice

3 of 12 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.
Mistral SmallCarta, Qapita
DeepSeek V4 FlashCarta, Qapita alternatives: Ledgy
Llama 4 MaverickCarta, Pulley, Qapita

Carta first, Qapita an alternative

8 of 12 modelsQapita was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Carta alternatives: Cake Equity, Pulley, Qapita
GPT-5.4 miniCarta alternatives: Eqvista, Ledgy, Shareworks
Gemini 3.5 FlashCarta alternatives: ClosingWell, Ledgy, Pulley, Qapita
Perplexity SonarCarta alternatives: Qapita
Grok 4.1 FastCarta alternatives: Ledgy, Pulley
Qwen 3.7 FlashCarta alternatives: Pulley, Qapita
Kimi K2Carta alternatives: Cake Equity, Eqvista, Ledgy, Pulley
MiniMax M2.5Carta, Shareworks alternatives: EquityZen, Ledgy

Qapita first, Carta not the choice

1 of 12 modelsCarta was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GLM 4.7 FlashXQapita alternatives: Cake Equity, Capshare, Mantle, Pulley

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Carta leads by eleven points.
Carta16%#4 of 6
Qapita5%#5 of 6
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Carta leads by thirty-one points.
Carta44%#1 of 8
Qapita14%#2 of 8
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Carta leads by twenty-five points.
Carta34%#1 of 9
Qapita9%#3 of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Carta

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.

“Skip enterprise tools like Carta's paid plans (Build/Grow can run $3,000–$12,000/year” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Several industry voices explicitly recommend *not* working with Carta.” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Carta for core trust reasons” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Carta (Scale/Enterprise Tier): The institutional default... highly capable for late-stage secondary transactions, but it is also the most expensive and has faced scrutiny over aggressive pricing hikes.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“The industry standard... the platform that virtually every institutional investor, auditor, and law firm recognizes as the *authoritative* equity record.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Institutional trust & full compliance depth | Carta... you'll likely end up there for credibility and compliance depth despite the cost” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Qapita

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.

“Strong in Asia-Pacific, but not a leader in the US/EU.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“Qapita and Carta are the most frequently recommended due to their scalability, global compliance features” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Qapita offers the best balance of full-lifecycle features and transparent pricing for mid-market scale” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Carta and Qapita are the top recommendations based on scalability, feature set, and industry adoption” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Carta vs EqvistaQapita vs EqvistaThe full cap table management standing

Comparisons are drawn for the top three products in each category. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.