Finance AI Index
Index Vendors › Emburse Spend · September 2026 Edition
1 category · Named, not ranked

Emburse Spend

1Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
1 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
1 label, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Emburse Spend was named 1 time in Spend management platfor, where Ramp led with 49%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In spend management platfor · 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 Emburse Spend 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Spend management platformsSpend and procurement0%33 of 39100%1under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 49%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Emburse Spend 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 Emburse Spend across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast00000
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash00011
Llama 4 Maverick00000
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00000
MiniMax M2.500000

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-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative1 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“call it "the worst business decision we have made," including app instability and integration problems” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Spend management platfor · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Emburse Spend, over the 1 answer that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Emburse Spend was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
BILL Spend & Expense1 of 10Not in the top three
Brex1 of 10Not in the top three
Expensify1 of 10Not in the top three
Navan1 of 10Not in the top three
Rippling Spend1 of 10Not in the top three
SAP Concur1 of 10Not 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 Emburse Spend. 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 1 of the 1 answers that named Emburse Spend and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

apps.apple.com1
brex.com1
capterra.com1
capterra.ie1
emburse.comYour site1
g2.com1
geekflare.com1
getapp.co.nz1
learn.g2.com1
payhawk.com1

Nine of the ten domain citations in answers naming Emburse Spend came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Emburse Spend

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Emburse Spend; a claim can dispute any of them.
Emburse Spend (formerly Abacus) 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 Emburse Spend'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 Emburse Spend, 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 emburse.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.

Subscribe to the pack