Finance AI Index
Index Spend and procurement Supplier management › Gatekeeper vs Tradogram
Supplier management · September 2026 Edition

Gatekeeper vs Tradogram

One of twelve models named Gatekeeper first on the direct prompt; zero named Tradogram. Gatekeeper was named by eleven of the twelve models and Tradogram by ten and Gatekeeper carries 19 labels and Tradogram 11, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Gatekeeper

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

Tradogram

accepted challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

First-choice share6%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate11%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#4A position in a field of 10; printed, not drawn.
Labels1911A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Gatekeeper reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Procurify was named alongside these two in ten of the twelve direct answers. Procurify vs Gatekeeper · Procurify vs Tradogram · Precoro vs Gatekeeper

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 supplier 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.
GatekeeperFirst choices, of twelve modelsTradogram
Direct10
Paraphrase20
Comparative001 against Gatekeeper
Budget-constrained031 against Gatekeeper
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
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 Gatekeeper and Tradogram 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
Gatekeeper Tradogram first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Gatekeeper on the left and Tradogram on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Gatekeeper first, Tradogram not the choice

1 of 12 modelsTradogram was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Gatekeeper alternatives: Ivalua, Payhawk, Precoro

Neither was the first choice, one was named

9 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Gemini 3.5 FlashZip alternatives: Gatekeeper, Graphite Connect, Kodiak Hub, Procurify, Tipalti
Perplexity SonarProcurify alternatives: Gatekeeper, Kodiak Hub, Precoro
Grok 4.1 FastPrecoro, Procurify alternatives: Gatekeeper, Kodiak Hub
Mistral SmallProcurify alternatives: Gatekeeper, Kodiak Hub, Precoro
DeepSeek V4 FlashPrecoro, Procurify alternatives: Gatekeeper, Kodiak Hub
Qwen 3.7 FlashProcurify alternatives: Gatekeeper, Kodiak Hub, Precoro
Kimi K2Precoro, Procurify alternatives: Gatekeeper, Kodiak Hub
GLM 4.7 FlashXProcurify alternatives: Coupa, Gatekeeper, Precoro, SAP Ariba
MiniMax M2.5Precoro, Procurify alternatives: Gatekeeper, Zip

Neither was named

2 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniProcurify alternatives: SAP Ariba
Llama 4 MaverickPrecoro

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
Tradogram leads by fourteen points.
Tradogram14%#2 of 10
Gatekeeper0%#6 of 10
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Gatekeeper6%#3 of 10
Tradogram6%#4 of 10
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Gatekeeper leads at enterprise.
Gatekeeper5%#5 of 7
Tradogram0%#– of 7
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Gatekeeper

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

“Smaller/mid-market alternatives like Gatekeeper (contract-focused, ~$875/mo) ... exist but lack the full SRM depth.” Grok 4.1 Fast · comparative prompt · soft negative
“~$1,245/month | Contract lifecycle management | Mid-market businesses needing contract management” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · soft negative
“Gatekeeper has emerged as the industry standard for organisations that demand a unified, risk-first approach to supplier management” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Start with Gatekeeper if vendor contracts, compliance, and governance are central to your needs” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“The Best All-Rounder: Gatekeeper ... this is the strongest choice for the mid-market.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice

What the models said about Tradogram

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

“Tradogram (Best Free Option) ... Truly minimal budget / starting out: Start with Tradogram's free plan” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared

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.