Index › Treasury and cash › Cash flow forecasting › Chaser vs Float

Cash flow forecasting · September 2026 Edition

Chaser vs Float

Four of twelve models named Chaser first on the direct prompt; zero named Float. Chaser was named by nine of the twelve models and Float by twelve and Chaser carries 13 labels and Float 27, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Chaser

accepted challenger

Named in six categories this edition.

Float

accepted challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

First-choice share8%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.

Negative rate0%22%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.

Rank in category#3#5A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.

Labels1327A count; the two differ.

The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Chaser reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Cube was named alongside these two in nine of the twelve direct answers. Agicap vs Chaser · Agicap vs Float · Tesorio vs Chaser

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 cash flow forecasting page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.

ChaserFirst choices, of twelve modelsFloat

Direct40

Paraphrase00

Comparative03

Budget-constrained023 against Float

Scale-constrained00

Negative013 against Float

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 Chaser and Float stood in it.

Model	Direct	Paraphrase	Comparative	Budget-constrained	Scale-constrained	Negative
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

Chaser

Float

first choice

named as an alternative

argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Chaser on the left and Float on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Chaser first, Float an alternative

4 of 12 modelsFloat was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.

Grok 4.1 FastChaser, Drivetrain alternatives: Abacum, Upflow

Qwen 3.7 FlashChaser alternatives: Abacum, Phocas Software, Vena

GLM 4.7 FlashXChaser alternatives: Abacum, Drivetrain, Float, Futrli, Upflow

MiniMax M2.5Chaser alternatives: Cube, Tesorio

Neither was the first choice, one was named

6 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.

GPT-5.4 miniAgicap alternatives: Cube, Float, Tesorio

Perplexity SonarAbacum, Drivetrain alternatives: Chaser, Cube, Vena

Mistral SmallCube alternatives: Abacum, Chaser

DeepSeek V4 FlashAbacum alternatives: Centime, Chaser, Cube, Drivetrain

Llama 4 MaverickCube alternatives: Abacum, Agicap, Chaser, GTreasury

Kimi K2Tesorio alternatives: Agicap, Chaser, Cube, Float

Neither was named

2 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.

Claude Haiku 4.5Tesorio alternatives: Billtrust, Cube, Drivetrain

Gemini 3.5 FlashCentime, Tesorio alternatives: Agicap, Cube, Mosaic, Trovata

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

Float leads by twenty-five points.

Float#1 of 8

Chaser#– of 8

The full small business standing →

Mid-marketThe figures above

The order flips: Chaser leads at mid-market.

Chaser#3 of 14

Float#5 of 14

The full mid-market standing →

Enterprise

Level: the same share of first choices.

Chaser#– of 10

Float#10 of 10

The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Chaser

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

“Best for Collection Uncertainty: Chaser ... Chaser is highly rated for mid-market B2B businesses” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Float

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

“Avoid if: Your business has peaks/troughs (e.g., retail, tourism). Users call it "hopeless" without heavy manual tweaks.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · hard negative

“Float has been criticized for being "absolutely hopeless for seasonal business as it can only predict income based on the previous 3 months or manual guessing"a” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · soft negative

“Some tools, like Float or Fluidly, may not be suitable for rapidly growing or contracting businesses” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative

“If I had to pick one best option for most budget-conscious small businesses, it would be Float” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice

“If you want live operational cash visibility, look at Float or Dryrun.” GPT-5.4 mini · comparative prompt · first choice

“the best value is usually Float if you use Xero or QuickBooks Online” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · first choice

Also compared

Agicap vs Chaser Agicap vs Float Tesorio vs Chaser Tesorio vs Float Chaser vs Cube Chaser vs Abacum Chaser vs Cash Flow Frog Chaser vs Kyriba Cube vs Float Float vs Abacum Float vs Cash Flow Frog Float vs Kyriba All twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full cash flow forecasting 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.