Every category where a model named Excel/Google Sheets 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
Cash flow forecasting	Treasury and cash	0%	85 of 86	100%	3	under 10 labels · led by Agicap at 18%
FP&A platforms	Planning and analysis	0%	21 of 52	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Vena at 15%
Financial modeling and scenario planning	Planning and analysis	0%	27 of 114	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Datarails at 19%
Financial close management	Accounting and close	0%	66 of 68	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 60%
Supplier management	Spend and procurement	0%	37 of 80	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Procurify at 26%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Excel/Google Sheets 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 Excel/Google Sheets 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	0	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1	2
Kimi K2	0	0	0	1	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

Direct5 labels1

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative1 label1not counted in share

Budget-constrained16 labels3

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative16 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative39 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 5 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: quick business modeling, small datasets, scenario analysis ... Need simple business forecasting? Excel / Sheets” GPT-5.4 mini · Financial modeling · comparative prompt · first choice

“If you're just getting started, this is often the right baseline before adding a specialized tool.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · FP&A platforms · budget prompt · alternative

“I'd suggest starting with Excel or Google Sheets if your needs are simple” MiniMax M2.5 · FP&A platforms · budget prompt · alternative

“(Free): Still viable for basics (many reviews recommend starting here)” Grok 4.1 Fast · FP&A platforms · budget 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.

“Avoid Spreadsheets Eventually: While Excel/Google Sheets are "free," they become inefficient and error-prone” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Cash flow forecasting · budget prompt · hard negative

“remains the #1 trap... treat that as your biggest risk to mitigate — not a tool to keep.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Cash flow forecasting · negative prompt · hard negative

“relying on Excel/Google Sheets for close management is widely recognized as problematic” Kimi K2 · Financial close manageme · negative prompt · hard negative

“they are the number-one "tool" to move away from as complexity grows” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Cash flow forecasting · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Excel/Google Sheets, over the 39 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Excel/Google Sheets was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Fathom13 of 395Not in the top three

QuickBooks Online10 of 393Not in the top three

Jirav10 of 390Not in the top three

Xero9 of 392Not in the top three

Float8 of 392Not in the top three

Cube8 of 390Not in the top three

Clockwork7 of 393Not in the top three

Anaplan7 of 390Not in the top three

LiveFlow6 of 392Not in the top three

Wave6 of 391Not 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 Excel/Google Sheets. 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 32 of the 39 answers that named Excel/Google Sheets and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cubesoftware.com15

g2.com13

drivetrain.ai11

fathomhq.com11

worldmetrics.org8

numeric.io7

reddit.com7

softwareadvice.com7

capterra.com6

clockwork.ai6

No domain is on file for Excel/Google Sheets, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

fathomhq.com/blog/the-6-best-financial-modelling-software-tools7

clockwork.ai/blog/best-fpa-software-small-business6

cubesoftware.com/blog/best-fpa-software-for-small-businesses5

cubesoftware.com/blog/financial-modeling-software5

drivetrain.ai/solutions/financial-planning-analysis-software5

golimelight.com/blog/fpa-software-for-small-business5

cubesoftware.com/blog/best-cash-forecasting-software4

datarails.com/best-financial-modeling-software4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Excel/Google Sheets

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

Excel / Google Sheets 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 Excel/Google Sheets'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 Excel/Google Sheets, 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 the vendor's own domain 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.