Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › Close · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Close

9Judge labels

0First choices

6Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Close was named 3 times in Financial close manageme, where FloQast led with 60%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business67 of 87

under the label threshold

Mid-market65 of 68

under the label threshold

Enterprise58 of 67

under the label threshold

In financial close manageme · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Close 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
Financial close management	Accounting and close	0%	65 of 68	67%	3	under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 60%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative6 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

“Best for all-in-one sales outreach” Perplexity Sonar · Financial close manageme · comparative 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.

“Note: This is a sales CRM tool, NOT financial close software — common confusion” Kimi K2 · Financial close manageme · negative prompt · hard negative

“Common complaints... Limited reporting/customization... Avoid if: Not heavy on outbound calls/SMS” Grok 4.1 Fast · Financial close manageme · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Close, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Close was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Pipedrive4 of 92Not in the top three

Salesforce4 of 91Not in the top three

BlackLine4 of 90Not in the top three

HubSpot4 of 90Not in the top three

FloQast3 of 91Not in the top three

Freshsales3 of 90Not in the top three

Asana2 of 90Not in the top three

Copper2 of 90Not in the top three

Monday.com2 of 90Not in the top three

Workiva2 of 90Not 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 Close. 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 8 of the 9 answers that named Close and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com7

numeric.io5

close.comYour site4

capterra.com3

crm.org3

doublehq.com3

learn.g2.com3

netgain.tech3

scalesuite.com.au3

bestautomationtoolsforbusiness.com2

Thirty-two of the thirty-six domain citations in answers naming Close came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

numeric.io/blog/financial-close-software5

g2.com/products/close/reviews4

close.com/blog/reasons-not-to-buy-close-crm3

learn.g2.com/best-financial-close-software3

scalesuite.com.au/resources/month-end-close-software-comparison3

bestautomationtoolsforbusiness.com/blog/close-pros-and-cons-guide-20262

bluecopa.com/blog/close-management-software2

doublehq.com/blog/6-best-close-management-tools-internal-finance-teams2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Close

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

Close (CRM) 1Close CRM 1Close CRM (close.io) 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 Close'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 Close, 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 close.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.