Every category where a model named Younium 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
Revenue recognition	Accounting and close	0%	25 of 77	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by Maxio at 15%
Invoicing software	Receivables and billing	0%	50 of 86	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Wave at 19%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Younium 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 Younium 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	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
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	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1

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

Direct18 labels3

Paraphrase7 labels1

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels1

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative34 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 5 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.

“Younium is a strong fit for mid-market and enterprise SaaS companies that manage recurring subscriptions” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Invoicing software · direct prompt · alternative

“Built for B2B SaaS subscription businesses, applies per-contract ASC 606 and IFRS 15 rules” MiniMax M2.5 · Revenue recognition · comparative prompt · alternative

“Younium is positioned specifically for that use case” Perplexity Sonar · Revenue recognition · direct prompt · alternative

“For SMBs or simple setups: ScaleXP, Younium.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Revenue recognition · 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 Younium, over the 34 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Younium was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Maxio16 of 343Not in the top three

RightRev11 of 343Not in the top three

Zuora Revenue9 of 344Not in the top three

Sage Intacct9 of 341Not in the top three

LedgerUp8 of 342Not in the top three

NetSuite Advanced Revenue Management8 of 341Not in the top three

SAP Revenue Accounting and Reporting7 of 342Not in the top three

Chargebee RevRec5 of 341Not in the top three

Zenskar5 of 340Not in the top three

BILL4 of 342Not 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 Younium. 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 30 of the 34 answers that named Younium and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

younium.comYour site27

ledgerup.ai17

zenskar.com10

guideflow.com9

rightrev.com9

dualentry.com8

eleven.run8

getapp.com8

hubifi.com8

worldmetrics.org8

Eighty-five of the 112 domain citations in answers naming Younium came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

younium.com/blog/revenue-recognition-software21

ledgerup.ai/resources/7-best-revenue-recognition-software-for-saas-202613

dualentry.com/blog/best-revenue-recognition-software8

eleven.run/blog/best-revenue-recognition-software8

guideflow.com/blog/revenue-recognition-software8

rightrev.com/top-revenue-recognition-software-2026-a-comprehensive-buyers-guide8

pipedrive.com/en/blog/best-revenue-recognition-software7

younium.com/blog/accounts-receivable-software7

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 Younium'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 Younium, 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 younium.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.