Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › SupplyHive · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

SupplyHive

2Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

2 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SupplyHive was named 2 times in Supplier management, where Procurify led with 26%. 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-market27 of 80

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In supplier management · 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 SupplyHive 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
Supplier management	Spend and procurement	0%	27 of 80	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Procurify at 26%

Movement

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 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.

“platforms getting more positive mentions include: HICX, Kodiak Hub, SupplyHive” Kimi K2 · Supplier management · negative prompt · alternative

“purpose-built tools like SupplyHive for scorecards/performance” Grok 4.1 Fast · Supplier management · negative 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 SupplyHive, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SupplyHive was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Coupa2 of 20Not in the top three

HICX2 of 20Not in the top three

Ivalua2 of 20Not in the top three

Kodiak Hub2 of 20Not in the top three

SAP Ariba2 of 20Not in the top three

Esker1 of 20Not in the top three

GEP SMART1 of 20Not in the top three

Graphite Connect1 of 20Not in the top three

Jaggaer1 of 20Not in the top three

Precoro1 of 20Not 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 SupplyHive. 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 2 of the 2 answers that named SupplyHive and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

capterra.com2

g2.com2

gartner.com2

highradius.com2

learn.g2.com2

reddit.com2

stampli.com2

suplari.com2

trustpilot.com2

anydb.com1

Nineteen of the nineteen domain citations in answers naming SupplyHive came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

capterra.com/p/115928/Coupa/reviews2

g2.com/products/sap-ariba/reviews2

gartner.com/reviews/market/supplier-risk-management-solutions2

highradius.com/resources/Blog/best-supplier-management-tools2

learn.g2.com/best-supplier-relationship-management-software2

stampli.com/blog/accounts-payable/coupa-reviews2

suplari.com/blog/best-supplier-performance-management-software2

trustpilot.com/review/www.ariba.com2

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 SupplyHive'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 SupplyHive, 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 supplyhive.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.