Finance AI Index

Index › Vendors › Zoho · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Zoho

6Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

4 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, 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. Zoho was named 3 times in Invoicing software and 1 other category, where Wave led with 19%. 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-market69 of 86

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In invoicing software · 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 Zoho 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
Invoicing software	Receivables and billing	0%	69 of 86	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by Wave at 19%
Accounts receivable automation	Receivables and billing	0%	74 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 Zoho 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 Zoho across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1
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

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

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative3 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative6 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“specifically calls out Wave, Zoho, and Square as having restrictions in their free tiers” Perplexity Sonar · Invoicing software · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Zoho, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Zoho was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

BILL2 of 60Not in the top three

QuickBooks Online2 of 60Not in the top three

Fluid CRM1 of 61Not in the top three

HighRadius1 of 61Not in the top three

Pagero1 of 61Not in the top three

Pipedrive1 of 61Not in the top three

Sovos1 of 61Not in the top three

Basware1 of 60Not in the top three

Billtrust1 of 60Not in the top three

Centime1 of 60Not 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 Zoho. 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 6 of the 6 answers that named Zoho and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

worldmetrics.org4

comparatif-pro.com2

erpresearch.com2

gitnux.org2

invoicemonk.com2

learn.g2.com2

mindsprint.com2

reddit.com2

softwareadvice.com2

stripe.com2

Twenty-two of the twenty-two domain citations in answers naming Zoho came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

comparatif-pro.com/en/blog/best-electronic-invoicing-software2

invoicemonk.com/en/best-invoicing-software2

learn.g2.com/best-billing-software2

mindsprint.com/resources/blogs/e-invoicing-software2

stripe.com/resources/more/invoice-software-for-small-businesses-a-guide-to-get-started2

thedigitalprojectmanager.com/tools/best-e-invoicing-software2

zapier.com/blog/best-free-invoice-software2

accountsreceivable.ai/blog/chaser-pricing1

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 Zoho'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 Zoho, 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 zoho.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.