Index › Accounting and close › Financial close manageme › Numeric vs Prophix

Financial close management · October 2026 Edition

Numeric vs Prophix

Zero of fourteen models named Numeric first on the direct prompt; one named Prophix. Numeric was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Prophix by nine and Numeric carries 44 labels and Prophix 17, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Numeric

accepted challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

Prophix

accepted challenger

Named in nine categories this edition.

First-choice share15%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.

Negative rate7%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.

Rank in category#2#3A position in a field of 8; printed, not drawn.

Labels4417A count; the two differ.

The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Numeric reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.FloQast was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. FloQast vs Numeric · FloQast vs Prophix · Numeric vs Trintech

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the financial close management page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.

NumericFirst choices, of fourteen modelsProphix

Direct011 against Numeric

Paraphrase10

Comparative20

Budget-constrained60

Scale-constrained11

Negative002 against Numeric

Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Numeric and Prophix stood in it.

Model	Direct	Paraphrase	Comparative	Budget-constrained	Scale-constrained	Negative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B

Numeric

Prophix

first choice

named as an alternative

argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Numeric on the left and Prophix on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Numeric and Prophix stood in it.

Prophix first, Numeric not the choice

1 of 14 modelsNumeric was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.

Mistral SmallProphix alternatives: Bluecopa, FloQast, Workiva

Neither was the first choice, one was named

11 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.

Claude Haiku 4.5FloQast alternatives: Numeric, Trintech Adra

Gemini 3.5 FlashFloQast alternatives: Numeric, Trintech Adra

Perplexity SonarFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Prophix

Grok 4.1 FastFloQast alternatives: Cube, Numeric, Prophix, Trintech Adra

DeepSeek V4 FlashFloQast alternatives: Numeric, Planful, Trintech Adra

Qwen 3.7 FlashFloQast, Workiva alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric, OneStream, Prophix, Trintech Adra

Kimi K2FloQast alternatives: Numeric, Trintech Adra

GLM 4.7 FlashXFloQast alternatives: Numeric, Prophix, Workiva

MiniMax M2.5FloQast alternatives: Cube, Prophix, Workiva

GPT-6 LunaFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric

Muse Glimmer 30BFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric, Trintech Adra

Neither was named

2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.

GPT-5.4 miniFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Trintech, Trintech Adra, Workiva

Llama 4 Maverickno first choice

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.

Small business

Numeric leads by twenty-two points.

Numeric#1 of 11

Prophix#7 of 11

The full small business standing →

Mid-marketThe figures above

Numeric leads by eleven points.

Numeric#2 of 8

Prophix#3 of 8

The full mid-market standing →

Enterprise

Numeric leads by four points.

Numeric#5 of 8

Prophix#– of 8

The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Numeric

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.

“Noted as becoming expensive/unpredictable at scale (e.g., $360K+/month for thousands of users).” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative

“Smaller user community; fewer integrations compared with FloQast/Workiva. Still evolving” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · soft negative

“Numeric – Can become expensive and unpredictable with thousands of users.” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative

“Choose Numeric if you are a modern, fast-growing company that wants to leverage AI to automate transactional matching” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice

What the models said about Prophix

No label in this category carried a quote.

Also compared

FloQast vs Numeric FloQast vs Prophix Numeric vs Trintech Numeric vs Workiva Numeric vs BlackLine Prophix vs Trintech Prophix vs Workiva Prophix vs BlackLine All fifteen head-to-head pages and the full financial close manageme standing

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.