Index › Vendors › GEP · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

GEP

12Judge labels

1First choices

2Negative labels

8 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. GEP was named 2 times in Strategic sourcing and 1 other category, where Precoro led with 17%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business121 of 150

under the label threshold

Mid-market17 of 127

under the label threshold

Enterprise13 of 61

under the label threshold

In strategic sourcing · 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 GEP 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
Strategic sourcing	Spend and procurement	2%	17 of 127	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Precoro at 17%
Procure-to-pay	Spend and procurement	0%	36 of 85	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Procurify at 45%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0
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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative4 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 label1

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative12 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.

“shortlist against Coupa, Jaggaer, GEP SMART, and Ivalua” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Strategic sourcing · scale prompt · first choice

“Choose GEP or Zycus if you want a broad S2P suite with automation-oriented procurement capabilities.” GPT-5.4 mini · Procure-to-pay · 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 GEP, over the 12 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GEP was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

SAP Ariba11 of 126Not in the top three

Coupa10 of 121Not in the top three

Ivalua7 of 120Not in the top three

Jaggaer7 of 120Not in the top three

Oracle Fusion Cloud Procurement5 of 120Not in the top three

Zycus3 of 120Not in the top three

Fairmarkit2 of 120Not in the top three

Market Dojo2 of 120Not in the top three

Precoro2 of 120Not in the top three

Zip2 of 120Not 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 GEP. 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 10 of the 12 answers that named GEP and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com4

guideflow.com4

ivalua.com4

learn.g2.com3

mindsprint.com3

sap.com3

siit.io3

walkme.com3

worldmetrics.org3

doss.com2

No domain is on file for GEP, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

mindsprint.com/resources/blogs/b2b-procurement-platform3

siit.io/blog/best-procurement-software3

doss.com/trends/best-procurement-platforms-for-2026-a-complete-buyers-guide-for-physical-p2

gartner.com/reviews/market/strategic-sourcing-application-suites2

guideflow.com/blog/procurement-software2

ivalua.com/blog/procurement-automation-software2

learn.g2.com/best-procure-to-pay-software2

suplari.com/blog/sourcing-strategy-software-key-capabilities-and-benefits2

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 GEP'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 GEP, 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.