Every category where a model named Jaggaer 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%	13 of 127	28%	18	criticized challenger
Supplier management	Spend and procurement	0%	20 of 80	22%	18	accepted challenger
Procure-to-pay	Spend and procurement	0%	16 of 85	14%	14	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Jaggaer 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 Jaggaer 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	0	0	3	0	3
GPT-5.4 mini	0	2	1	1	4
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	2	2	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	3	1	4
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	1	2	5
Mistral Small	0	2	3	0	5
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	3	0	0	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	2	0	3
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	2	3	2	7
Kimi K2	0	0	3	2	5
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	2	0	3
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	2	1	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

Direct34 labels2

Paraphrase18 labels2

Comparative57 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained16 labelsNone

Scale-constrained27 labels3

Negative35 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative187 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.

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

“Choose Ivalua or JAGGAER if you need advanced source-to-pay flexibility and sourcing complexity.” GPT-5.4 mini · Procure-to-pay · comparative prompt · alternative

“more focused on operational supplier performance management and procurement workflows” GPT-5.4 mini · Supplier management · comparative prompt · alternative

“Jaggaer = the "specialist's choice" for complex sourcing in specific industries.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Supplier management · 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.

“Significant Concerns - Technical issues: Data loss, system crashes, transaction delays causing financial strain” Kimi K2 · Supplier management · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid massive enterprise suites like SAP Ariba, Coupa (Enterprise tier), or JAGGAER” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Strategic sourcing · scale prompt · hard negative

“What to Avoid - Enterprise suites (Coupa, SAP Ariba, JAGGAER)” Kimi K2 · Procure-to-pay · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

“capable but can be a mismatch if you only need a focused supplier-management workflow rather than a broader procurement suite” GPT-5.4 mini · Supplier management · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Jaggaer, over the 187 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Jaggaer was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Coupa177 of 18747Not in the top three

SAP Ariba167 of 18745Not in the top three

Ivalua122 of 1874Not in the top three

GEP SMART87 of 1874Not in the top three

Oracle Fusion Cloud Procurement50 of 1870Not in the top three

Zycus47 of 1870Not in the top three

Precoro41 of 18712Not in the top three

Procurify38 of 1876Not in the top three

Zip22 of 1871Not in the top three

Tradogram21 of 1874Not 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 Jaggaer. 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 151 of the 187 answers that named Jaggaer and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com73

g2.com55

worldmetrics.org48

mindsprint.com46

zycus.com43

learn.g2.com42

softwareconnect.com40

spendflo.com38

procurementvms.com37

kodiakhub.com35

457 of the 457 domain citations in answers naming Jaggaer came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/strategic-sourcing-application-suites28

learn.g2.com/best-supplier-relationship-management-software23

techno-pulse.com/2026/06/best-ai-procurement-tools-in-2026-coupa.html21

procurementaiagents.com/compare/sap-ariba-vs-ivalua-vs-coupa20

walkme.com/blog/best-strategic-sourcing-software20

zycus.com/compare/best-strategic-sourcing-esourcing-software20

procurementvms.com/procurement/best-procurement-software.html18

softwareconnect.com/roundups/best-strategic-sourcing-software18

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Jaggaer

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

JAGGAER 16JAGGAER ONE 1JAGGAER ONE / Supplier Management & Performance 1Jaggaer (GEP SmartSource) 1Jaggaer (OnDemand) 1Jaggr 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 Jaggaer'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 Jaggaer, 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 jaggaer.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.