7 categories · RankedSAP Concur
Standing by category
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expense management | Spend and procurement | 2% | 9 of 46 | 32% | 40 | criticized challenger |
| Corporate travel management | Spend and procurement | 0% | 60 of 60 | 49% | 39 | criticized challenger |
| Spend management platforms | Spend and procurement | 0% | 15 of 39 | 28% | 18 | criticized challenger |
| Accounts payable automation | Spend and procurement | 0% | 20 of 60 | 17% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by Stampli at 19% |
| Corporate cards | Spend and procurement | 0% | 38 of 63 | 25% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 69% |
| Invoicing software | Receivables and billing | 0% | 68 of 86 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Wave at 19% |
| B2B payment acceptance | Receivables and billing | 0% | 58 of 91 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Helcim at 17% |
Movement
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 8 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 9 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 2 | 3 | 9 | 14 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 8 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 11 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 4 | 0 | 7 | 11 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 8 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 12 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 6 |
By framing
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Spendesk, Expensify, SAP Concur, or Rippling Spend are often cited as top recommendations” Mistral Small · Expense management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“SAP Concur and Navan lead for large enterprises” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Expense management · comparative prompt · first choice
“usually the safer choice if you already use Concur for expense management... more commonly associated with larger or more established programs” Perplexity Sonar · Corporate travel managem · direct prompt · alternative
“Best suited for mid-market and enterprise organizations that need a compliance-grade, globally capable travel and expense platform” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Corporate travel managem · direct 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.
“Verdict: Avoid if you are a small-to-medium-sized business (SMB) or startup. The tool is far too heavy and expensive” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Spend management platfor · negative prompt · hard negative
“for a mid-sized company, it is generally not recommended unless you have a specific reason to stay” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Corporate travel managem · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“The most frequently criticized option among users, with consistent themes across G2 and Trustpilot” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Expense management · negative prompt · hard negative
“users report: Random glitches, inconsistent pricing, inadequate reporting... Sluggish performance” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Corporate travel managem · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
What carried it into the answer
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 323 of the 385 answers that named SAP Concur and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
1,036 of the 1,036 domain citations in answers naming SAP Concur came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Names read as SAP Concur
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 Concur'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 Concur, 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.