Mid-marketgoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsNot ranked
First American Payment Systems
4Judge labels
0First choices
4Negative labels
2 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. First American Payment Systems was named 2 times in B2B payment acceptance and 1 other category, where Versapay led with 19%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market77 of 94
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In b2b payment acceptance · 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 First American Payment Systems 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B2B payment acceptance | Receivables and billing | 0% | 77 of 94 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Versapay at 19% | goneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026. |
| Embedded payments platforms | Receivables and billing | 0% | 91 of 110 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Stripe Connect at 53% |
Movement
Since September 2026, First American Payment Systems held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · B2B payment acceptance · by segment
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B2B payment acceptance | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 72 → 77 of 94 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 10 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated First American Payment Systems across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated First American Payment Systems across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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
Negative4 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.
“avoid unless you have carefully verified the contracting entity and terms” GPT-6 Luna · B2B payment acceptance · negative prompt · hard negative
“The FTC says it sued over allegedly misleading sales pitches and hidden fees; the company paid $4.9 million to settle.” GPT-6 Luna · Embedded payments · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as First American Payment Systems, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and First American Payment Systems was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as First American Payment Systems, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and First American Payment Systems was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 First American Payment Systems. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 4 of the 4 answers that named First American Payment Systems and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
ftc.gov4
adyen.com1
allaboutadvertisinglaw.com1
bbb.org1
businessexpert.co.uk1
fdic.gov1
federalreserve.gov1
g2.com1
gauravtiwari.org1
givepayments.com1
No domain is on file for First American Payment Systems, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Follow First American Payment Systems
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
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 First American Payment Systems'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 First American Payment Systems, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for First American Payment Systems by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where First American Payment Systems is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name First American Payment Systems, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.