Every category where a model named BillingPlatform 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
Revenue recognition	Accounting and close	2%	12 of 77	0%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for BillingPlatform 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 BillingPlatform across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase11 labels2

Comparative7 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative3 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative25 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 4 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.

“Rated highest for enterprise (9.1/10), strong for mid-size finance teams needing scheduled ASC 606 accounting” MiniMax M2.5 · Revenue recognition · comparative prompt · first choice

“Best Overall for Mid-Size Teams ... "the strongest pick for mid-size finance teams"” Kimi K2 · Revenue recognition · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“A great fit if you need scheduled ASC 606 accounting with strong traceability across contract changes” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Revenue recognition · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Best for more complex billing / enterprise-style revenue rules: BillingPlatform” GPT-5.4 mini · Revenue recognition · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as BillingPlatform, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and BillingPlatform was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Zuora Revenue12 of 256Not in the top three

RightRev12 of 251Not in the top three

Maxio10 of 252Not in the top three

NetSuite Advanced Revenue Management10 of 250Not in the top three

SAP Revenue Accounting and Reporting9 of 250Not in the top three

Sage Intacct7 of 253Not in the top three

LedgerUp7 of 252Not in the top three

Ordway7 of 251Not in the top three

Chargebee RevRec7 of 250Not in the top three

Trullion6 of 252Not 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 BillingPlatform. 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 22 of the 25 answers that named BillingPlatform and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

worldmetrics.org19

ledgerup.ai16

hubifi.com14

rightrev.com12

dualentry.com9

eleven.run9

younium.com8

wifitalents.com7

getapp.com6

guideflow.com6

106 of the 106 domain citations in answers naming BillingPlatform came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

worldmetrics.org/best/asc-606-revenue-recognition-software15

ledgerup.ai/resources/best-asc-606-revenue-recognition-software-202614

ledgerup.ai/resources/7-best-revenue-recognition-software-for-saas-202612

worldmetrics.org/best/revenue-recognition-software10

dualentry.com/blog/best-revenue-recognition-software9

eleven.run/blog/best-revenue-recognition-software9

rightrev.com/top-revenue-recognition-software-2026-a-comprehensive-buyers-guide9

younium.com/blog/revenue-recognition-software8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 BillingPlatform'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 BillingPlatform, 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 billingplatform.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.