Every category where a model named Complies.ai 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
Internal controls and SOX	Tax and compliance	11%	3 of 71	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by AuditBoard at 18%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	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	1	0	1
Mistral Small	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	1
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

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained13 labels11

Scale-constrained2 labels1

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative15 labels in all, every segment counted; 12 of the 12 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.

“Complies.ai stands out as one of the best SOX compliance software options based on transparent, low-cost pricing” Grok 4.1 Fast · Internal controls · budget prompt · first choice

“For the most budget-friendly options, Mitti and Complies stand out due to their low cost and ease of use.” Mistral Small · Internal controls · budget prompt · first choice

“If you need software under $5k/year: Use Complies.ai ($199/month Growth plan) for ITGC automation” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Internal controls · budget prompt · first choice

“Complies is the strongest fit for the tightest budgets because it publishes low starting prices” Perplexity Sonar · Internal controls · budget 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Complies.ai, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Complies.ai was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Mitti10 of 151Not in the top three

Workiva8 of 151Not in the top three

AuditBoard7 of 150Not in the top three

Drata7 of 150Not in the top three

Vanta6 of 150Not in the top three

Hyperproof5 of 151Not in the top three

LogicGate Risk Cloud3 of 150Not in the top three

Process Street3 of 150Not in the top three

BlackLine2 of 150Not in the top three

FloQast2 of 150Not 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 Complies.ai. 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 14 of the 15 answers that named Complies.ai and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

complies.aiYour site14

mitti.com12

netwrix.com11

worldmetrics.org10

riskpublishing.com9

pathlock.com8

zipdo.co8

itprc.com7

optro.ai7

riskwatch.com6

Seventy-eight of the ninety-two domain citations in answers naming Complies.ai came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

complies.ai/blog/best-sox-compliance-software12

mitti.com/apps/sox-compliance-software12

complies.ai/sox-compliance-software11

netwrix.com/en/resources/blog/sox-compliance-software11

riskpublishing.com/best-sox-compliance-software-compared9

pathlock.com/the-19-best-sox-compliance-software-solutions8

itprc.com/sox-compliance-software7

optro.ai/blog/best-sox-management-software7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Complies.ai

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

Complies 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 Complies.ai'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 Complies.ai, 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 complies.ai 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.