Every category where a model named Occupier 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
Lease accounting	Accounting and close	0%	16 of 60	0%	10	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative10 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative19 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.

“Modern platforms with built‑in ASC 842/IFRS 16 automation, OCR, and ERP integration (e.g., DebtBook, FinQuery/LeaseQuery, Occupier, NetLease).” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Lease accounting · negative prompt · alternative

“Occupier → best for multi‑location tenants where real‑estate and finance share the same lease view.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Lease accounting · comparative prompt · alternative

“Emerging contender for growth‑stage and mid‑market organizations” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Lease accounting · scale prompt · alternative

“Occupier: Ideal for commercial real estate tenants.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Lease accounting · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Occupier, over the 19 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Occupier was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

FinQuery17 of 199Not in the top three

Visual Lease13 of 191Not in the top three

Trullion12 of 191Not in the top three

EZLease11 of 192Not in the top three

MRI ProLease8 of 191Not in the top three

Crunchafi8 of 190Not in the top three

NetLease8 of 190Not in the top three

Leasecake7 of 190Not in the top three

Nakisa Lease Administration7 of 190Not in the top three

DebtBook6 of 190Not 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 Occupier. 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 18 of the 19 answers that named Occupier and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

occupier.comYour site15

softwareconnect.com15

blackowlsystems.com11

debtbook.com10

trullion.com10

capterra.com9

g2.com9

gartner.com9

acquisition-international.com8

guideflow.com8

Eighty-nine of the 104 domain citations in answers naming Occupier came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

occupier.com/blog/best-lease-accounting-software15

softwareconnect.com/roundups/best-lease-accounting-software14

blackowlsystems.com/best-lease-accounting-software-in-2026-compared10

debtbook.com/blog/best-lease-accounting-software10

gartner.com/reviews/market/lease-accounting-and-management-software9

acquisition-international.com/best-lease-accounting-software-of-2026-from-compliance-to-ca8

capterra.com/lease-accounting-software8

guideflow.com/blog/lease-accounting-software8

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 Occupier'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 Occupier, 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 occupier.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.