Every category where a model named ReconArt 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
Account reconciliation	Accounting and close	0%	16 of 72	0%	14	accepted challenger

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	1	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	0	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	2	0	3
Mistral Small	0	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct4 labels1

Paraphrase5 labelsNone

Comparative15 labelsNone

Budget-constrained7 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative4 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative38 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 3 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.

“Prioritize reputable leaders like ReconArt, SolveXia, or Hevo for specific needs” Grok 4.1 Fast · Account reconciliation · negative prompt · first choice

“Choose ReconArt, SolveXia, or Duco if your main problem is transaction matching/data reconciliation” Perplexity Sonar · Account reconciliation · comparative prompt · alternative

“Choose ReconArt or SolveXia if you ... desperately need to match millions of rows of data” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Account reconciliation · comparative prompt · alternative

“ReconArt at $300/month is a strong alternative focused specifically on reconciliation” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Account reconciliation · budget 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 ReconArt, over the 38 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ReconArt was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

BlackLine31 of 3814Not in the top three

FloQast24 of 384Not in the top three

HighRadius19 of 380Not in the top three

Trintech14 of 382Not in the top three

QuickBooks Online12 of 386Not in the top three

Xero11 of 383Not in the top three

Numeric11 of 381Not in the top three

OneStream9 of 380Not in the top three

Trintech Adra8 of 380Not in the top three

Trintech Cadency7 of 381Not 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 ReconArt. 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 27 of the 38 answers that named ReconArt and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

numeric.io16

prophix.com14

worldmetrics.org14

airwallex.com13

bluecopa.com13

highradius.com13

ramp.com12

satvasolutions.com12

layer3labs.io11

gartner.com10

128 of the 128 domain citations in answers naming ReconArt came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

numeric.io/blog/account-reconciliation-software14

prophix.com/blog/the-10-best-account-reconciliation-software14

airwallex.com/en-us/blog/best-automated-reconciliation-software-solutions13

bluecopa.com/blog/account-reconciliation-tools12

ramp.com/blog/accounting-reconciliation-software12

satvasolutions.com/blog/best-reconciliation-software12

layer3labs.io/comparisons/best-bank-reconciliation-software11

gartner.com/reviews/market/financial-reconciliation-solutions10

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 ReconArt'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 ReconArt, 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 reconart.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.