Finance AI Index
Index › Planning and analysis › FP&A platforms › Clockwork vs Planful
FP&A platforms · September 2026 Edition

Clockwork vs Planful

Zero of twelve models named Clockwork first on the direct prompt; three named Planful. Clockwork was named by ten of the twelve models and Planful by eleven and Clockwork carries 13 labels and Planful 36, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Clockwork

accepted challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

Planful

accepted challenger

Named in nine categories this edition.

First-choice share15%10%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%11%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#4A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels1336A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Clockwork reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Pigment was named alongside these two in eight of the twelve direct answers. Vena vs Clockwork · Vena vs Planful · Pigment vs Clockwork

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 FP&A platforms page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
ClockworkFirst choices, of twelve modelsPlanful
Direct03
Paraphrase01
Comparative00
Budget-constrained701 against Planful
Scale-constrained01
Negative003 against Planful
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.

Every model, every framing

The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Clockwork and Planful stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
Clockwork Planful first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Clockwork on the left and Planful on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Planful first, Clockwork not the choice

3 of 12 modelsClockwork was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Planful alternatives: Pigment, Prophix, Vena
GPT-5.4 miniPlanful, Vena alternatives: Cube, Datarails
Perplexity SonarPlanful alternatives: Aleph, Centage, Pigment, Prophix, Vena

Neither was the first choice, one was named

3 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Gemini 3.5 FlashDrivetrain alternatives: Bob Finance, Cube, Planful
DeepSeek V4 FlashDatarails alternatives: Planful, Prophix, Vena
GLM 4.7 FlashXPigment alternatives: Aleph, Centage, Cube, Datarails, Planful, Prophix, Vena, Workday Adaptive Planning

Neither was named

6 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Grok 4.1 FastCube, Vena alternatives: Datarails, Pigment
Mistral SmallCentage alternatives: Abacum, Aleph, Datarails, Workday Adaptive Planning
Llama 4 MaverickPigment alternatives: Aleph, Centage, Workday Adaptive Planning
Qwen 3.7 FlashPigment alternatives: Aleph, Centage, Datarails, Workday Adaptive Planning
Kimi K2Pigment alternatives: Aleph, Centage, Workday Adaptive Planning
MiniMax M2.5Pigment alternatives: Aleph, Centage, Datarails, Workday Adaptive Planning

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
Clockwork leads by sixty points.
Clockwork60%#1 of 13
Planful0%#11 of 13
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Clockwork leads by four points.
Clockwork15%#3 of 16
Planful10%#4 of 16
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Clockwork0%#– of 12
Planful0%#11 of 12
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Clockwork

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

“Clockwork is the best FP&A software for a limited budget due to its balance of features, ease of use, and transparent pricing” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
“Clockwork is highlighted as a leading option that delivers forecasting, scenario planning, and an AI analyst from $149/month” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“The best FP&A software for a company with a limited budget is Clockwork, which is a strong overall option” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Planful

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

“Avoid or be cautious about enterprise platforms (Anaplan, Workday Adaptive, Planful, Pigment)” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“What to avoid when budget is tight ... overkill for a budget-conscious company” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Currently one of the leaders in this space. Excellent balance between a robust backend and a user-friendly frontend” Qwen 3.7 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
Also compared
Vena vs ClockworkVena vs PlanfulPigment vs ClockworkPigment vs PlanfulClockwork vs FathomClockwork vs CubeClockwork vs ProphixClockwork vs DatarailsPlanful vs FathomPlanful vs CubePlanful vs ProphixPlanful vs DatarailsAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full FP&A platforms standing

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