Index › Products › SS&C Intralinks · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

SS&C Intralinks

11Judge labels

2First choices

2Negative labels

6 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SS&C Intralinks was named 3 times in Virtual data rooms, where iDeals led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market26 of 48

under the label threshold

Enterprise7 of 55

under the label threshold

In virtual data rooms · 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 SS&C Intralinks 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	Since September 2026
Virtual data rooms	Equity and corporate	0%	26 of 48	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by iDeals at 25%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SS&C Intralinks yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated SS&C Intralinks across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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 labels1

Paraphrase2 labels1

Comparative5 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative11 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 4 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.

“The oldest and most established player in the market... However, it comes with a premium, often opaque pricing model and can be overly complex for smaller transactions.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Virtual data rooms · comparative prompt · alternative

“The default choice for ~$50M+ transactions; proven at massive deal scale” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Virtual data rooms · 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.

“They are feature-rich and offer white-glove service, but can be highly expensive.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Virtual data rooms · scale prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SS&C Intralinks, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SS&C Intralinks was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Datasite Diligence11 of 114Not among the top eight

iDeals10 of 112Not among the top eight

Ansarada9 of 111Not among the top eight

Firmex9 of 111Not among the top eight

DealRoom6 of 110Not among the top eight

ShareVault5 of 110Not among the top eight

SecureDocs4 of 110Not among the top eight

Box3 of 110Not among the top eight

FirmRoom3 of 110Not among the top eight

Govern 3653 of 110Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 SS&C Intralinks. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 11 of the 11 answers that named SS&C Intralinks and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

intralinks.com9

govern365.com7

firmex.com6

papermark.com6

peony.ink6

caplinked.com5

ctacquisitions.com5

dealroom.net5

fast.io5

idealsvdr.com5

No domain is on file for SS&C Intralinks, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

govern365.com/blog/virtual-data-room/best-data-room-providers6

intralinks.com/guides/top-10-virtual-data-room-providers6

peony.ink/blog/top-10-virtual-data-room-providers6

ctacquisitions.com/best-virtual-data-rooms-for-ma-20265

dealroom.net/resources/virtual-data-room-providers-comparison5

firmex.com/resources/vdr-tips-tricks/best-virtual-data-room-providers-in-20255

clinked.com/virtual-data-room-providers4

idealsvdr.com/blog/virtual-data-room/best-virtual-data-rooms-compared4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where SS&C Intralinks stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: not counted (“ss&c intralinks”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 26 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 26 of 48 in virtual data rooms

Segment leader

25%

iDeals

First choices: 2 across its categories
Named in: 11 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

Names read as SS&C Intralinks

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SS&C Intralinks; a claim can dispute any of them.

SS&C Intralinks (VDRPro) 1

Follow SS&C Intralinks

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

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 SS&C Intralinks'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 SS&C Intralinks, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for SS&C Intralinks by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where SS&C Intralinks is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name SS&C Intralinks, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.