10 categories · RankedSAP Ariba
456Judge labels
60First choices
199Negative labels
12 of 12Models named it
10Categories
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
40% in Supplier management for enterprise buyers
Rank 9 of 108 in the mid-market standing
1 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 29% of its 7 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business116 of 120
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market9 of 108
2%7 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise68 of 93
0%11 labels
criticized challenger
In global e-invoicing compl · 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 SAP Ariba 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Global e-invoicing compliance | Tax and compliance | 2% | 9 of 108 | 29% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Avalara at 28% |
| Supplier management | Spend and procurement | 0% | 80 of 80 | 62% | 40 | criticized challenger |
| Procure-to-pay | Spend and procurement | 0% | 85 of 85 | 51% | 37 | criticized challenger |
| Strategic sourcing | Spend and procurement | 0% | 127 of 127 | 63% | 30 | criticized challenger |
| Business bill pay | Treasury and cash | 0% | 58 of 69 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by BILL at 35% |
| Cash application | Receivables and billing | 0% | 82 of 83 | 100% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by HighRadius at 16% |
| Spend management platforms | Spend and procurement | 0% | 32 of 39 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 49% |
| Accounts payable automation | Spend and procurement | 0% | 54 of 60 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Stampli at 19% |
| Invoicing software | Receivables and billing | 0% | 81 of 86 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Wave at 19% |
| Lease accounting | Accounting and close | 0% | 52 of 60 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by FinQuery at 36% |
Movement
This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SAP Ariba 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 SAP Ariba 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 | 5 | 1 | 6 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 8 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 16 | 17 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 1 | 2 | 8 | 12 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 8 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 11 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 3 | 12 | 16 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 9 | 13 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 4 | 2 | 7 | 13 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 10 |
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
Direct87 labels26
Paraphrase69 labels21
Comparative93 labels20not counted in share
Budget-constrained59 labels10
Scale-constrained58 labels3
Negative90 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative456 labels in all, every segment counted; 60 of the 81 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.
“strong end-to-end integration across procurement, risk, and network-based supplier collaboration... SAP is strong across all three” GPT-5.4 mini · Supplier management · comparative prompt · first choice
“I'd suggest starting with Avalara or SAP Ariba if you have larger invoice volumes and international operations” MiniMax M2.5 · Global e-invoicing compl · direct prompt · first choice
“1. SAP Ariba - Best for: End-to-end supplier collaboration and large enterprises.” Mistral Small · Supplier management · comparative prompt · first choice
“Scale & Network: SAP Ariba leads with its vast ecosystem for broad supplier discovery.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Supplier management · comparative prompt · first choice
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.
“"Procurement systems are always convoluted but SAP Ariba is by far the worst! I would strongly encourage any procurement team to avoid using this platform."” Kimi K2 · Procure-to-pay · negative prompt · hard negative
“you must avoid the classic mistake of evaluating enterprise-level P2P suites designed for Fortune 500s (such as SAP Ariba or complex Oracle deployments)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Procure-to-pay · scale prompt · hard negative
“Avoid massive enterprise suites like SAP Ariba, Coupa (Enterprise tier), or JAGGAER unless you have a massive procurement team of 10+ people.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Strategic sourcing · scale prompt · hard negative
“The platforms to avoid for practical reasons ... are the heavyweight enterprise suites like SAP Ariba and Coupa” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Procure-to-pay · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP Ariba, over the 454 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Ariba was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 SAP Ariba. 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 368 of the 454 answers that named SAP Ariba and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
gartner.com154
g2.com131
mindsprint.com128
worldmetrics.org106
learn.g2.com104
softwareconnect.com81
spendflo.com77
zycus.com67
procurementvms.com63
softwareadvice.com63
974 of the 974 domain citations in answers naming SAP Ariba came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Names read as SAP Ariba
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SAP Ariba; a claim can dispute any of them.
Ariba 4SAP Ariba Supplier Management 3Ariba (SAP) 1SAP Ariba (now Coupa) 1SAP Ariba Cloud Edition 1SAP Ariba Invoicing / SAP Business Network 1SAP Ariba Sourcing (Light) 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 SAP Ariba'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 SAP Ariba, 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 sap.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.