Index › Planning and analysis › Financial modeling › Google Sheets vs Prophix

Financial modeling and scenario planning · October 2026 Edition

Google Sheets vs Prophix

Zero of fourteen models named Google Sheets first on the direct prompt; zero named Prophix. Google Sheets was named by twelve of the fourteen models and Prophix by seven and Google Sheets carries 13 labels and Prophix 10, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Google Sheets

accepted challenger

Named in fifteen categories this edition.

Prophix

accepted challenger

Named in nine categories this edition.

First-choice share9%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.

Negative rate15%10%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.

Rank in category#5#7A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.

Labels1310A count; the two differ.

The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Google Sheets reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Datarails was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Microsoft Excel vs Google Sheets · Microsoft Excel vs Prophix · Cube vs Google Sheets

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 modeling and scenario planning page.

By framing

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

Google SheetsFirst choices, of fourteen modelsProphix

Direct00

Paraphrase04

Comparative00

Budget-constrained60

Scale-constrained001 against Prophix

Negative002 against Google Sheets

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 Google Sheets 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

Google Sheets

Prophix

first choice

named as an alternative

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

The direct prompt

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

Neither was named

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

Claude Haiku 4.5Datarails alternatives: Cube, Drivetrain, Planful, Prophix One

GPT-5.4 miniDatarails, Planful alternatives: Anaplan, Vena

Gemini 3.5 FlashAleph, Cube alternatives: Abacum, Bob Finance, Pigment, Vena

Perplexity SonarDatarails, Limelight alternatives: Abacum, Workday Adaptive Planning

Grok 4.1 FastCube, Datarails, Drivetrain, Jirav alternatives: Abacum

Mistral SmallAbacum alternatives: Cube, Datarails

DeepSeek V4 FlashCube alternatives: Datarails, Jirav, Planful, Vena

Llama 4 Maverickno first choice

Qwen 3.7 FlashVena, Workday Adaptive Planning alternatives: Fathom, PlanGuru

Kimi K2Drivetrain alternatives: Mosaic, Pigment

GLM 4.7 FlashXDatarails alternatives: Abacum, Cube, Lucanet xP&A, Mosaic

MiniMax M2.5Drivetrain alternatives: Abacum, Cube, Datarails, Pigment

GPT-6 LunaWorkday Adaptive Planning alternatives: Cube, Vena

Muse Glimmer 30BDatarails alternatives: Cube, Drivetrain, Mosaic, Planful

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 is not named for this buyer.

Google Sheets#1 of 10

Prophixnot named

The full small business standing →

Mid-marketThe figures above

Google Sheets leads by three points.

Google Sheets#5 of 14

Prophix#7 of 14

The full mid-market standing →

Enterprise

Level: the same share of first choices.

Google Sheets#– of 12

Prophix#– of 12

The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Google Sheets

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

“starting with Google Sheets or Excel and upgrading to a dedicated tool ... is the most cost-effective approach” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice

“Best low-budget choice: Google Sheets for a small company building budgets, forecasts, and scenario models” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · first choice

“start with Microsoft Excel or Google Sheets if you need a simple, flexible solution” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Prophix

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

“Prophix, Oracle Cloud EPM, SAP Analytics Cloud: Full-featured, complex” GLM 4.7 FlashX · scale prompt · soft negative

Also compared

Microsoft Excel vs Google Sheets Microsoft Excel vs Prophix Cube vs Google Sheets Cube vs Prophix Vena vs Google Sheets Vena vs Prophix Datarails vs Google Sheets Datarails vs Prophix Google Sheets vs Drivetrain Google Sheets vs Workday Adaptive Planning Drivetrain vs Prophix Prophix vs Workday Adaptive Planning All twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full financial modeling 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.