AI Indexes
Finance AI Index
Index › Accounting and close › Financial close manageme › Prophix vs Workiva
Financial close management · October 2026 Edition

Prophix vs Workiva

One of fourteen models named Prophix first on the direct prompt; one named Workiva. Prophix was named by nine of the fourteen models and Workiva by eleven and Prophix carries 17 labels and Workiva 30, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Prophix

accepted challenger

Named in nine categories this edition.

Workiva

criticized challenger

Named in eleven categories this edition.

First-choice share4%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%33%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#5A position in a field of 8; printed, not drawn.
Labels1730A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Prophix 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 Prophix · FloQast vs Workiva · Numeric vs Prophix

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.
ProphixFirst choices, of fourteen modelsWorkiva
Direct11
Paraphrase001 against Workiva
Comparative00
Budget-constrained002 against Workiva
Scale-constrained102 against Workiva
Negative005 against Workiva
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 Prophix and Workiva stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
Prophix Workiva first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Prophix on the left and Workiva on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Prophix first, Workiva an alternative

1 of 14 modelsWorkiva was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Mistral SmallProphix alternatives: Bluecopa, FloQast, Workiva

Workiva first, Prophix an alternative

1 of 14 modelsProphix was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Qwen 3.7 FlashFloQast, Workiva alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric, OneStream, Prophix, Trintech Adra

Neither was the first choice, one was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
GPT-5.4 miniFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Trintech, Trintech Adra, Workiva
Perplexity SonarFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Prophix
Grok 4.1 FastFloQast alternatives: Cube, Numeric, Prophix, Trintech Adra
GLM 4.7 FlashXFloQast alternatives: Numeric, Prophix, Workiva
MiniMax M2.5FloQast alternatives: Cube, Prophix, Workiva

Neither was named

7 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5FloQast alternatives: Numeric, Trintech Adra
Gemini 3.5 FlashFloQast alternatives: Numeric, Trintech Adra
DeepSeek V4 FlashFloQast alternatives: Numeric, Planful, Trintech Adra
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2FloQast alternatives: Numeric, Trintech Adra
GPT-6 LunaFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric
Muse Glimmer 30BFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric, Trintech Adra

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
Prophix leads by three points.
Prophix3%#7 of 11
Workiva0%#9 of 11
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Prophix leads by two points.
Prophix4%#3 of 8
Workiva2%#5 of 8
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Workiva leads at enterprise.
Workiva4%#4 of 8
Prophix0%#– of 8
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Prophix

No label in this category carried a quote.

What the models said about Workiva

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

“Often criticized as overly complex and expensive for non-enterprise or mid-market needs; ... avoid if scalability or cost is a concern.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · hard negative
Also compared

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.