Every category where a model named Sweep 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
ESG and carbon reporting	Equity and corporate	25%	1 of 76	3%	37	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Sweep 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 Sweep 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	1	1	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	2	0	0	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	3	0	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	0	1	1	4
Mistral Small	2	0	1	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	2	1	1	0	4
Llama 4 Maverick	1	1	1	0	3
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	3	0	0	3
Kimi K2	1	1	2	0	4
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	1	1	0	4
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	1	0	3

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

Direct17 labels7

Paraphrase14 labels6

Comparative13 labelsNone

Budget-constrained9 labels1

Scale-constrained12 labels2

Negative8 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative73 labels in all, every segment counted; 16 of the 17 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.

“For most mid-market B2B companies, Sweep offers the strongest balance of supply chain support, framework coverage, and mid-market-appropriate pricing.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · ESG and carbon reporting · direct prompt · first choice

“Sweep or Plan A are excellent choices... If you are in Europe and require CSRD alignment, Sweep is highly recommended.” Mistral Small · ESG and carbon reporting · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Sweep and EcoOnline appear to be the most consistently recommended options tailored to your size and needs” MiniMax M2.5 · ESG and carbon reporting · direct prompt · first choice

“Greenly or Sweep | Both offer deep carbon accounting features and excellent supplier-engagement modules” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ESG and carbon reporting · direct 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.

“some unproven mid-market carbon tools like Sweep, Plan A... lack robust data governance” Grok 4.1 Fast · ESG and carbon reporting · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Sweep, over the 73 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sweep was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Workiva40 of 7313Not in the top three

Persefoni36 of 736Not in the top three

Greenly30 of 736Compare →

Watershed27 of 735Not in the top three

IBM Envizi27 of 731Not in the top three

Novisto23 of 734Compare →

Coolset20 of 731Not in the top three

Diligent ESG18 of 730Not in the top three

Plan A17 of 732Not in the top three

Salesforce Net Zero Cloud15 of 730Not 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 Sweep. 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 63 of the 73 answers that named Sweep and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

guideflow.com41

coolset.com38

gartner.com35

emissiontwin.com26

esg-one.co21

pulsora.com21

g2.com19

onestopesg.com19

sustaenia.com18

aibusinessgeek.com17

255 of the 255 domain citations in answers naming Sweep came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/esg-reporting-software39

coolset.com/academy/best-esg-reporting-software-tools35

gartner.com/reviews/market/esg-management-and-reporting-software32

emissiontwin.com/blog/best-esg-reporting-software21

pulsora.com/blog/best-esg-reporting-software20

esg-one.co/blog/esg-reporting-software-comparison18

aibusinessgeek.com/articles/ai-esg-reporting-software-202617

onestopesg.com/esg-resources/best-esg-reporting-software13

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Sweep

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

Sweep basic 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 Sweep'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 Sweep, 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 sweep.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.