Every category where a model named Google Sheets 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	13%	2 of 114	0%	10	accepted challenger
Financial reporting and dashboards	Planning and analysis	0%	127 of 133	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by Sage Intacct at 27%
Fixed asset accounting	Accounting and close	0%	91 of 94	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by Sage Fixed Assets at 29%
FP&A platforms	Planning and analysis	0%	26 of 52	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Vena at 15%
Cap table management	Equity and corporate	0%	39 of 41	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Carta at 44%
Cash flow forecasting	Treasury and cash	0%	44 of 86	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Agicap at 18%
Financial consolidation	Accounting and close	0%	93 of 96	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Prophix at 19%
Internal controls and SOX	Tax and compliance	0%	65 of 71	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by AuditBoard at 18%
Lease accounting	Accounting and close	0%	54 of 60	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by FinQuery at 36%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained21 labels10

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative67 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative95 labels in all, every segment counted; 10 of the 12 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.

“Start with Google Sheets or Excel, and optionally use EasyFinancialModels for templates.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Financial modeling · budget prompt · first choice

“Microsoft Excel or Google Sheets remain the practical sweet spot” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Financial modeling · budget prompt · first choice

“includes options like Google Sheets or Excel, which are free or low-cost” Llama 4 Maverick · Financial modeling · budget prompt · first choice

“Start with Google Sheets if you're pre-revenue or under $1M ARR.” Kimi K2 · Financial modeling · budget prompt · first choice

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.

“Spreadsheets (Excel and Google Sheets) as a System of Record ... they are the number one tool you should move away from” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Fixed asset accounting · negative prompt · hard negative

“Spreadsheets (Excel, Google Sheets, etc.) | Prone to formula errors, no built-in audit trail... scaling limits.” MiniMax M2.5 · Fixed asset accounting · negative prompt · hard negative

“The "Spreadsheet Trap" (Excel & Google Sheets) ... they are still the most dangerous reporting tools in existence” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Financial reporting · negative prompt · hard negative

“Relying on interconnected Excel or Google Sheets workbooks to consolidate financial data” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Financial consolidation · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Google Sheets, over the 95 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Sheets was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Excel65 of 954Not in the top three

Excel23 of 950Not in the top three

Xero13 of 953Not in the top three

Tableau13 of 950Not in the top three

Microsoft Power BI12 of 951Not in the top three

Fathom10 of 950Not in the top three

Jirav10 of 950Not in the top three

Clockwork9 of 955Not in the top three

QuickBooks Online9 of 952Not in the top three

Finmark9 of 950Not 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 Google Sheets. 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 65 of the 95 answers that named Google Sheets and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cubesoftware.com18

worldmetrics.org17

drivetrain.ai14

farseer.com13

g2.com13

linkedin.com13

gartner.com11

learn.g2.com11

reddit.com11

gitnux.org9

130 of the 130 domain citations in answers naming Google Sheets came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cubesoftware.com/blog/financial-modeling-software9

clockwork.ai/blog/best-fpa-software-small-business8

golimelight.com/blog/fpa-software-for-small-business7

drivetrain.ai/solutions/financial-modeling-software6

drivetrain.ai/solutions/financial-planning-analysis-software6

farseer.com/blog/financial-modeling-tools6

fathomhq.com/blog/the-6-best-financial-modelling-software-tools6

improvado.io/blog/marketing-reporting-software6

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Google Sheets

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

spreadsheets/Google Sheets 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 Google Sheets'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 Google Sheets, 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 google.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.