Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › Concourse · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Concourse

5Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

4 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. Concourse was named 3 times in Treasury management syst, where Trovata led with 18%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market30 of 124

under the label threshold

Enterprise38 of 88

under the label threshold

In treasury management syst · 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 Concourse 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
Treasury management systems	Treasury and cash	0%	30 of 124	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Trovata at 18%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0
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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Offers AI agents for autonomous treasury and finance work, with strong auditability and a fit for mid-market to global enterprise users.” Mistral Small · Treasury management syst · direct 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 Concourse, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Concourse was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

GTreasury5 of 52Not in the top three

Trovata5 of 51Not in the top three

Kyriba3 of 52Not in the top three

Nomentia3 of 50Not in the top three

HighRadius2 of 50Not in the top three

Centime1 of 50Not in the top three

FIS1 of 50Not in the top three

ION Treasury1 of 50Not in the top three

Modern Treasury1 of 50Not in the top three

Nilus1 of 50Not 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 Concourse. 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 5 of the 5 answers that named Concourse and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

concourse.aiYour site5

eco.com5

gartner.com5

viewpointanalysis.com4

nomentia.com3

debtbook.com2

dilynx.com2

nilus.com2

techvendorindex.com2

treasury.ripple.com2

Twenty-seven of the thirty-two domain citations in answers naming Concourse came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

concourse.ai/insights/best-treasury-management-software-20265

eco.com/support/en/articles/16402412-best-treasury-management-software-20265

gartner.com/reviews/market/treasury-management-systems5

viewpointanalysis.com/post/treasury-management-software-options-20264

nomentia.com/blog/best-treasury-management-solutions3

debtbook.com/blog/best-treasury-management-systems2

dilynx.com/automation/treasury/rankings2

nilus.com/blog/best-treasury-management-software2

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 Concourse'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 Concourse, 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 concourse.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.