Every category where a model named Crunchafi 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
Lease accounting	Accounting and close	2%	9 of 60	7%	15	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct6 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labels1

Comparative15 labelsNone

Budget-constrained7 labels1

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative36 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.

“Crunchafi offers a per-lease pricing model that gives budget-conscious buyers a concrete cost basis” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Lease accounting · budget prompt · first choice

“Best for: Companies that want pay-per-lease scalability rather than fixed monthly subscriptions, especially CPA firms.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Lease accounting · budget prompt · alternative

“Best for: Companies that prefer a pay-as-you-go model or work closely with an external CPA firm.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Lease accounting · budget prompt · alternative

“Best For: CPA firms and advisors managing lease compliance for multiple clients.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Lease accounting · 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.

“Data entry inaccuracies, lack of OCR for lease abstraction, cumbersome journal entries” Grok 4.1 Fast · Lease accounting · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Crunchafi, over the 36 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Crunchafi was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

FinQuery23 of 3612Not in the top three

Visual Lease21 of 360Not in the top three

EZLease18 of 366Not in the top three

Trullion17 of 360Not in the top three

NetLease14 of 361Not in the top three

iLeasePro13 of 368Not in the top three

MRI ProLease9 of 360Not in the top three

LeaseGuru8 of 365Not in the top three

Black Owl Systems8 of 360Not in the top three

DebtBook8 of 360Not 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 Crunchafi. 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 31 of the 36 answers that named Crunchafi and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

softwareconnect.com25

debtbook.com23

capterra.com19

g2.com19

occupier.com17

blackowlsystems.com16

gartner.com16

softwareadvice.com16

getapp.com14

trullion.com12

177 of the 177 domain citations in answers naming Crunchafi came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

softwareconnect.com/roundups/best-lease-accounting-software24

debtbook.com/blog/best-lease-accounting-software23

gartner.com/reviews/market/lease-accounting-and-management-software16

occupier.com/blog/best-lease-accounting-software16

capterra.com/lease-accounting-software14

softwareadvice.com/property/lease-accounting-comparison14

softwareconnect.com/roundups/best-lease-management-software14

blackowlsystems.com/best-lease-accounting-software-in-2026-compared13

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Crunchafi

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

Crunchafi (formerly LeaseCrunch) 8Crunchifi 1LeaseCrunch / Crunchafi 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 Crunchafi'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 Crunchafi, 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 crunchafi.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.