Every category where a model named Acumatica for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
ERP systems	Accounting and close	2%	6 of 70	9%	45	accepted challenger
Financial reporting and dashboards	Planning and analysis	2%	17 of 133	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Sage Intacct at 27%
Accounting software	Accounting and close	0%	11 of 56	0%	16	accepted challenger
Fixed asset accounting	Accounting and close	0%	35 of 94	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Sage Fixed Assets at 29%
Financial consolidation	Accounting and close	0%	65 of 96	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Prophix at 19%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Acumatica yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Acumatica across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	3	0	4
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	5	2	1	9
Perplexity Sonar	0	3	1	0	4
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	3	5	0	8
Mistral Small	0	2	2	0	4
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	3	3	0	7
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	2	0	4
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	7	1	2	10
Kimi K2	0	1	4	0	5
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	3	3	1	7
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	2	0	3

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct27 labelsNone

Paraphrase24 labelsNone

Comparative26 labelsNone

Budget-constrained24 labels14

Scale-constrained24 labels3

Negative19 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative144 labels in all, every segment counted; 17 of the 19 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Known for its modern cloud-native architecture, flexible API layer, and unique consumption-based pricing model” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ERP systems · scale prompt · first choice

“market-leading options ... Acumatica” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Financial reporting · scale prompt · first choice

“cloud-based ERP software designed for small to mid-sized businesses, offering advanced financial management solutions” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Accounting software · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“a good fit if you want flexibility and cloud scalability for a mid-sized business modernizing systems” Perplexity Sonar · ERP systems · paraphrase prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“slightly more expensive than the others ... Implementation partners can be pricey; it is designed for mid-sized businesses, so it might be overkill” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ERP systems · budget prompt · soft negative

“The Danger: Growing Pains... rapid expansion can sometimes lead to inconsistent release management” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ERP systems · negative prompt · soft negative

“Upfront implementation and licensing costs are higher than Zoho or open-source solutions” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ERP systems · budget prompt · soft negative

“Cons: Higher monthly minimums, may not suit very small businesses” GLM 4.7 FlashX · ERP systems · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Acumatica, over the 144 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Acumatica was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Oracle NetSuite126 of 14429Not in the top three

Sage Intacct81 of 14414Not in the top three

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central72 of 14416Not in the top three

SAP S/4HANA65 of 1447Not in the top three

Odoo54 of 14411Not in the top three

Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP38 of 1441Not in the top three

Microsoft Dynamics 36531 of 1442Not in the top three

QuickBooks30 of 1440Not in the top three

SAP Business One28 of 1440Not in the top three

Xero25 of 1440Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Acumatica. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 109 of the 144 answers that named Acumatica and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

erpresearch.com72

softwareconnect.com33

forbes.com29

houseblend.io26

randgroup.com26

learn.g2.com25

netsuite.com25

topdynamicspartners.com22

spendesk.com20

erp-pilot.com18

296 of the 296 domain citations in answers naming Acumatica came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

erpresearch.com/en-us/best-erp25

forbes.com/advisor/business/software/best-erp-systems21

spendesk.com/blog/top-erp-systems20

learn.g2.com/best-erp-software19

zapier.com/blog/best-erp-software17

randgroup.com/insights/services/evaluation-selection/top-erps-for-midsize-companies16

techrepublic.com/article/enterprise-accounting-software16

clefincode.com/blog/global-digital-vibes/en/comparative-analysis-of-leading-erp-systems-2014

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Acumatica

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Acumatica; a claim can dispute any of them.

Acumatica Cloud ERP 2

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Acumatica's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Acumatica, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at acumatica.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.