Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability

5Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

3 of 12Models named it

1Category

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. Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability was named 2 times in ESG and carbon reporting, where Sweep led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business71 of 89

under the label threshold

Mid-market68 of 76

under the label threshold

Enterprise59 of 64

under the label threshold

In esg and carbon reporting · 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 Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability 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
ESG and carbon reporting	Equity and corporate	0%	68 of 76	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by Sweep at 25%

Movement

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

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“disappoint on ESG depth, audit trails, or emissions accuracy” Grok 4.1 Fast · ESG and carbon reporting · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Workiva5 of 52Not in the top three

IBM Envizi5 of 50Not in the top three

Watershed5 of 50Not in the top three

Greenly4 of 50Not in the top three

Novisto4 of 50Not in the top three

Persefoni4 of 50Not in the top three

Sweep4 of 50Not in the top three

Diligent ESG3 of 50Not in the top three

Normative3 of 50Not in the top three

Sphera3 of 50Not 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 Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability. 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 5 of the 5 answers that named Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com4

emeraldpower.io3

knowesg.com3

linkedin.com3

onestopesg.com3

pulsora.com3

coolset.com2

emissiontwin.com2

energycap.com2

esg-one.co2

Twenty-seven of the twenty-seven domain citations in answers naming Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/esg-management-and-reporting-software4

emeraldpower.io/articles/top-10-esg-reporting-software-platforms-for-2026-global-guide3

onestopesg.com/esg-resources/best-esg-reporting-software3

pulsora.com/blog/best-esg-reporting-software3

coolset.com/academy/best-esg-reporting-software-tools2

energycap.com/blog/sustainability-reporting-platform2

esg-one.co/blog/esg-reporting-software-comparison2

facilio.com/blog/esg-reporting-software2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability

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

Microsoft Sustainability Cloud 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 Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability'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 Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability, 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 microsoft.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.