Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › ezyCollect · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

ezyCollect

9Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. ezyCollect was named 5 times in Accounts receivable auto and 1 other category, where Zoho Books led with 15%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business42 of 59

under the label threshold

Mid-market37 of 77

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In accounts receivable auto · 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 ezyCollect 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
Accounts receivable automation	Receivables and billing	0%	37 of 77	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Zoho Books at 15%
B2B credit management	Receivables and billing	0%	52 of 82	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Tesorio at 16%

Movement

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

Model	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as ezyCollect, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ezyCollect was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Chaser9 of 93Not in the top three

Paidnice8 of 91Not in the top three

Satago6 of 91Not in the top three

Upflow5 of 90Not in the top three

HighRadius4 of 91Not in the top three

Kolleno4 of 90Not in the top three

Creditsafe3 of 90Not in the top three

Esker3 of 90Not in the top three

HighRadius Credit Cloud3 of 90Not in the top three

Invoiced3 of 90Not 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 ezyCollect. 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 8 of the 9 answers that named ezyCollect and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

accounting.events7

chaserhq.com7

worldmetrics.org6

zipdo.co6

creditpulse.com4

erpresearch.com4

paidnice.com4

trevipay.com4

g2.com3

ledgerup.ai3

Forty-eight of the forty-eight domain citations in answers naming ezyCollect came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

accounting.events/reviews/best-credit-control-software4

chaserhq.com/blog/best-credit-management-software4

creditpulse.com/blog/best-credit-management-software4

erpresearch.com/erp-add-ons/ar-collections/chaser4

trevipay.com/resource-center/blog/best-accounts-receivable-automation-software4

zipdo.co/best/creditmanagement-software4

accounting.events/reviews/best-ar-automation-software3

chaserhq.com/blog/debt-collection-software3

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 ezyCollect'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 ezyCollect, 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 ezycollect.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.