Every category where a model named Finmark 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
Financial modeling and scenario planning	Planning and analysis	0%	68 of 114	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by Datarails at 19%
Cash flow forecasting	Treasury and cash	0%	61 of 86	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Agicap at 18%

Movement

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

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

Direct4 labels3

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained11 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative25 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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.

“Now part of BILL, pricing starts reasonable for small teams” MiniMax M2.5 · Financial modeling · budget prompt · alternative

“Try LivePlan or Finmark.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Financial modeling · 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 pricier dedicated tools like Finmark ($50+/month)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Financial modeling · budget prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Finmark, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Finmark was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Excel10 of 253Not in the top three

Jirav10 of 252Not in the top three

Anaplan10 of 250Not in the top three

Google Sheets9 of 255Not in the top three

Fathom9 of 251Not in the top three

Cube9 of 250Not in the top three

Forecastr8 of 250Not in the top three

Datarails7 of 250Not in the top three

Float5 of 252Not in the top three

LiveFlow5 of 251Not 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 Finmark. 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 23 of the 25 answers that named Finmark and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cubesoftware.com18

fathomhq.com14

datarails.com10

drivetrain.ai10

productive.io10

compassapp.ai9

farseer.com9

gitnux.org9

learn.g2.com7

golimelight.com6

102 of the 102 domain citations in answers naming Finmark came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cubesoftware.com/blog/financial-modeling-software16

fathomhq.com/blog/the-6-best-financial-modelling-software-tools12

datarails.com/best-financial-modeling-software10

productive.io/blog/financial-modeling-software10

compassapp.ai/compare/best-financial-modelling-software-20269

farseer.com/blog/financial-modeling-tools9

drivetrain.ai/solutions/financial-modeling-software8

adlega.com/compare/best-saas-financial-modeling-software5

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 Finmark'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 Finmark, 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 finmark.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.