Every category where a model named Billtrust 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
Accounts receivable automation	Receivables and billing	12%	3 of 77	13%	30	accepted challenger
B2B payment acceptance	Receivables and billing	9%	4 of 91	0%	13	accepted challenger
Invoicing software	Receivables and billing	2%	9 of 86	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by Wave at 19%
Cash application	Receivables and billing	0%	23 of 83	34%	35	criticized challenger
B2B credit management	Receivables and billing	0%	24 of 82	0%	13	accepted challenger
Cash flow forecasting	Treasury and cash	0%	33 of 86	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Agicap at 18%
Business bill pay	Treasury and cash	0%	26 of 69	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by BILL at 35%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Billtrust 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 Billtrust 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	1	4	3	1	9
GPT-5.4 mini	1	3	1	0	5
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	4	3	4	11
Perplexity Sonar	0	5	2	2	9
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	9	2	2	15
Mistral Small	0	4	2	1	7
DeepSeek V4 Flash	3	2	1	2	8
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	1	1	4
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	4	1	1	7
Kimi K2	2	6	0	1	9
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	3	4	1	9
MiniMax M2.5	2	2	1	0	5

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

Direct70 labels11

Paraphrase60 labels12

Comparative61 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained33 labels1

Scale-constrained29 labelsNone

Negative25 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative278 labels in all, every segment counted; 24 of the 26 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.

“Frequently ranked #1–3 in mid-market segments by G2 Grids (Billtrust leads Enterprise/Mid-Market AR Automation)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Accounts receivable auto · direct prompt · first choice

“I'd suggest evaluating Billtrust or Versapay first, as they're specifically designed for your segment” Kimi K2 · Accounts receivable auto · direct prompt · first choice

“Upflow (for workflow focus) or Billtrust (for full-stack AR focus) are the safest starting points” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Accounts receivable auto · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Billtrust if your priority is customer-facing payments and easier B2B collections operations.” GPT-5.4 mini · Accounts receivable auto · direct prompt · first choice

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.

“2. Billtrust Reported Issues: - Invoicing and payment problems... Quote-only pricing makes cost comparison difficult” Kimi K2 · Accounts receivable auto · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid the usual enterprise leaders like HighRadius, Billtrust, and Esker” Perplexity Sonar · Cash application · budget prompt · hard negative

“generally not recommended for the typical mid-market company” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Cash application · direct prompt · hard negative

“Enterprise-class, custom-priced, typically six figures annually.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Cash application · budget prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Billtrust, over the 278 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Billtrust was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

HighRadius200 of 27878Not in the top three

Versapay119 of 27815Compare →

Esker105 of 2784Not in the top three

Tesorio63 of 2786Not in the top three

Gaviti51 of 27811Not in the top three

BlackLine Cash Application51 of 2782Not in the top three

BILL46 of 27812Not in the top three

Upflow46 of 2788Not in the top three

Chaser42 of 2788Not in the top three

Quadient AR42 of 2786Compare →

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 Billtrust. 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 239 of the 278 answers that named Billtrust and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

highradius.com146

chaserhq.com93

learn.g2.com89

worldmetrics.org89

lunos.ai75

upflow.io75

billtrust.comYour site70

stuut.ai68

transformance.ai66

g2.com63

764 of the 834 domain citations in answers naming Billtrust came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

highradius.com/resources/Blog/best-cash-application-automation-tools57

upflow.io/software/best-cash-application-software54

cashbook.com/best-cash-application-tools-2026-official-guide46

lunos.ai/blog/best-cash-application-software46

billtrust.com/resources/blog/top-accounts-receivable-software-solutions44

learn.g2.com/best-accounts-receivable-software44

rex.inc/resources/comparisons/best-cash-application-software44

trevipay.com/resource-center/blog/best-accounts-receivable-automation-software42

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Billtrust

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

HighRadius/Billtrust 1

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 Billtrust'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 Billtrust, 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 billtrust.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.