Finance AI Index
Index Vendors › Invoiced · September 2026 Edition
7 categories · Ranked

Invoiced

65Judge labels
7First choices
11Negative labels
12 of 12Models named it
7Categories
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
14% in Invoicing software for mid-market buyers
Rank 4 of 86 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
4 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 20% of its 15 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentStrongest at mid-market.
In invoicing software · 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 Invoiced 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrant
Invoicing softwareReceivables and billing14%4 of 8620%15accepted challenger
Accounts receivable automationReceivables and billing0%20 of 770%8under 10 labels · led by Zoho Books at 15%
Global e-invoicing complianceTax and compliance0%108 of 108100%3under 10 labels · led by Avalara at 28%
B2B payment acceptanceReceivables and billing0%30 of 910%2under 10 labels · led by Helcim at 17%
Accounts payable automationSpend and procurement0%30 of 600%1under 10 labels · led by Stampli at 19%
B2B credit managementReceivables and billing0%43 of 820%1under 10 labels · led by Tesorio at 16%
Cash applicationReceivables and billing0%36 of 830%1under 10 labels · led by HighRadius at 16%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Invoiced 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 Invoiced across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.502013
GPT-5.4 mini01001
Gemini 3.5 Flash11002
Perplexity Sonar10102
Grok 4.1 Fast00101
Mistral Small10012
DeepSeek V4 Flash30115
Llama 4 Maverick02305
Qwen 3.7 Flash00011
Kimi K203014
GLM 4.7 FlashX11002
MiniMax M2.501113

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
Direct16 labels4
Paraphrase14 labels3
Comparative19 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained3 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative12 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative65 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 9 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.

“Best overall for mid‑market B2B: Invoiced (by Flywire) if you want end‑to‑end AR automation and global payments.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Invoicing software · direct prompt · first choice
“For a mid-sized B2B company specifically, Invoiced is the strongest dedicated choice.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Invoicing software · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For mid-market (under $100M AR): Look at Invoiced (highest user satisfaction on G2)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Cash application · negative prompt · first choice
“SAP and Invoiced are excellent for comprehensive invoicing and compliance” Mistral Small · Invoicing software · direct 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.

“Reviews dropped sharply after its acquisition by Flywire, with long-term customers reporting sudden cancellation of accounts without warning” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Global e-invoicing compl · negative prompt · hard negative
“users frequently complain about payment issues, restrictive invoice caps that increase costs, and poor customer support” Mistral Small · Invoicing software · negative prompt · hard negative
“Rated "Poor" (~2.6/5 on Trustpilot). Long-term users report sudden account cancellations without warning” Kimi K2 · Global e-invoicing compl · negative prompt · hard negative
“Support deterioration ... Unexpected cancellations ... Integration problems” MiniMax M2.5 · Invoicing software · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Invoiced, over the 65 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Invoiced was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
BILL28 of 6514Not in the top three
Billtrust23 of 653Not in the top three
Versapay23 of 652Not in the top three
Upflow23 of 651Not in the top three
HighRadius21 of 6510Not in the top three
Chaser19 of 651Not in the top three
Quadient AR14 of 650Not in the top three
FreshBooks12 of 652Not in the top three
QuickBooks11 of 652Not in the top three
Gaviti9 of 650Not 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 Invoiced. 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 63 of the 65 answers that named Invoiced and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com23
highradius.com21
chaserhq.com20
learn.g2.com19
bill.com16
worldmetrics.org16
younium.com15
billtrust.com14
gitnux.org14
softwareadvice.com14

172 of the 172 domain citations in answers naming Invoiced came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Invoiced

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Invoiced; a claim can dispute any of them.
Invoiced (by Flywire) 6Invoiced by Flywire 2Invoiced.com 2
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 Invoiced'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 Invoiced, 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 invoiced.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.

Subscribe to the pack