Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › Tabs · September 2026 Edition

3 categories · Named, not ranked

Tabs

20Judge labels

0First choices

4Negative labels

9 of 12Models named it

3Categories

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

Standing

7 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Tabs was named 7 times in AI accounting assistants and 2 other categories, where Sage Intacct 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-market23 of 79

under the label threshold

Enterprise23 of 76

under the label threshold

In ai accounting assistants · 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 Tabs 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
AI accounting assistants	Accounting and close	0%	23 of 79	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by Sage Intacct at 25%
Revenue recognition	Accounting and close	0%	39 of 77	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Maxio at 15%
Accounts receivable automation	Receivables and billing	0%	68 of 77	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Zoho Books at 15%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	1	3
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative20 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.

“Best for Complex B2B Contract Billing & Revenue Recognition: Tabs” Gemini 3.5 Flash · AI accounting assistants · direct prompt · alternative

“Turns signed contracts into ASC 606 schedules automatically” Perplexity Sonar · AI accounting assistants · comparative prompt · alternative

“Tabs excels at a "contract-to-close" workflow” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Revenue recognition · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“AI‑driven ASC 606 revenue schedules | Tabs” GLM 4.7 FlashX · AI accounting assistants · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Tabs, over the 20 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Tabs was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Sage Intacct9 of 201Not in the top three

Maxio8 of 202Not in the top three

QuickBooks Online8 of 201Not in the top three

Numeric7 of 202Not in the top three

Vic.ai7 of 200Not in the top three

Trullion6 of 200Not in the top three

Chargebee RevRec5 of 200Not in the top three

Workday Financial Management5 of 200Not in the top three

Xero5 of 200Not in the top three

Oracle NetSuite4 of 201Not 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 Tabs. 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 14 of the 20 answers that named Tabs and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ledgerup.ai6

numeric.io6

blog.alguna.com5

hubifi.com5

chargebee.com4

dualentry.com4

finlens.app4

highradius.com4

rightrev.com4

tabs.comYour site4

Forty-two of the forty-six domain citations in answers naming Tabs came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

blog.alguna.com/best-tools-for-saas-revenue-recognition4

numeric.io/blog/ai-accounting-tools4

chargebee.com/blog/avoid-the-revenue-recognition-pitfalls3

dualentry.com/blog/best-ai-accounting-software3

guideflow.com/blog/revenue-recognition-software3

highradius.com/resources/Blog/best-revenue-recognition-tools3

intuit.com/blog/innovative-thinking/best-ai-accounting-software-tools3

ledgerup.ai/resources/7-best-revenue-recognition-software-for-saas-20263

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 Tabs'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 Tabs, 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 tabs.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.