Every category where a model named Normative 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%	18 of 76	10%	10	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

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

Direct4 labelsNone

Paraphrase13 labels1

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative26 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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 for mid-market companies needing certified carbon accounting with regulatory reporting” Claude Haiku 4.5 · ESG and carbon reporting · direct prompt · alternative

“Best for science‑led, EU‑aligned reporting with an accessible entry point: Normative” GLM 4.7 FlashX · ESG and carbon reporting · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“### 3. Normative — Best for Finance-Integrated Accounting” MiniMax M2.5 · ESG and carbon reporting · direct prompt · alternative

“Best if you're building your first carbon baseline” DeepSeek V4 Flash · ESG and carbon reporting · paraphrase 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.

“early versions of Greenly, Normative, or basic carbon calculators ... Why to be cautious” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ESG and carbon reporting · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Normative, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Normative was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Watershed15 of 264Not in the top three

Persefoni14 of 261Not in the top three

Greenly13 of 264Not in the top three

Sweep12 of 263Not in the top three

IBM Envizi12 of 261Not in the top three

Workiva11 of 265Not in the top three

Diligent ESG9 of 261Not in the top three

Novisto8 of 260Not in the top three

Coolset5 of 260Not in the top three

Plan A5 of 260Not 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 Normative. 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 24 of the 26 answers that named Normative and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com12

emeraldpower.io10

coolset.com9

guideflow.com9

keyesg.com8

seedling.earth8

onestopesg.com7

pulsora.com7

esg-one.co6

greenly.earth6

Eighty-two of the eighty-two domain citations in answers naming Normative came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/esg-management-and-reporting-software9

guideflow.com/blog/esg-reporting-software9

keyesg.com/article/best-carbon-accounting-software-platforms8

coolset.com/academy/best-esg-reporting-software-tools7

emeraldpower.io/articles/top-10-esg-reporting-software-platforms-for-2026-global-guide7

pulsora.com/blog/best-esg-reporting-software7

esg-one.co/blog/esg-reporting-software-comparison6

seedling.earth/en-us/post/the-best-carbon-accounting-software6

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 Normative'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 Normative, 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 normative.io 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.