Every category where a model named FIS 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
Treasury management systems	Treasury and cash	0%	20 of 124	0%	8	under 10 labels · led by Trovata at 18%
B2B payment acceptance	Receivables and billing	0%	42 of 91	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Helcim at 17%
Cash application	Receivables and billing	0%	59 of 83	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by HighRadius at 16%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1
Mistral Small	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	3	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	1	3
Kimi K2	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct5 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labels1

Comparative17 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative5 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative37 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 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.

“Recognized for Most Innovative Treasury Solution, leveraging AI and advanced analytics.” Mistral Small · Treasury management syst · comparative prompt · alternative

“Top for largest multinationals; robust multi-entity, multi-currency operations” Grok 4.1 Fast · Treasury management syst · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best For: B2B companies with complex international payment structures” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Treasury management syst · direct prompt · alternative

“Their Integrity platform offers a mix of SaaS and hosted solutions” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Treasury management syst · comparative 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as FIS, over the 37 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and FIS was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Kyriba25 of 3711Not in the top three

GTreasury15 of 371Not in the top three

SAP Treasury and Risk Management14 of 370Not in the top three

HighRadius13 of 371Not in the top three

ION Treasury10 of 370Not in the top three

Trovata9 of 370Not in the top three

BILL7 of 370Not in the top three

Nomentia7 of 370Not in the top three

Fiserv6 of 371Not in the top three

Agicap5 of 372Not 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 FIS. 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 29 of the 37 answers that named FIS and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com21

worldmetrics.org14

treasury.ripple.com10

checkthat.ai7

gfmag.com7

agicap.com6

debtbook.com6

g2.com6

nomentia.com6

eco.com5

Eighty-eight of the eighty-eight domain citations in answers naming FIS came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/treasury-management-systems14

treasury.ripple.com/posts/top-10-treasury-management-systems10

gfmag.com/transaction-banking/best-treasury-cash-management-providers-2024-systems-service7

debtbook.com/blog/best-treasury-management-systems6

checkthat.ai/answers/what-are-the-best-treasury-management-software-tools5

eco.com/support/en/articles/16402412-best-treasury-management-software-20265

euromoney.com/corporate-banking/competitive-intelligence/top-ranked-tms-providers5

nomentia.com/blog/best-treasury-management-solutions5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as FIS

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

FIS (FIS Global) 1FIS (Quantum/Integrity) 1FIS / Fiserv 1FIS Global (Integrity SaaS Solution) 1FIS Global (Integrity) 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 FIS'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 FIS, 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 fisglobal.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.