AI Indexes
Finance AI Index
Index › Planning and analysis › FP&A platforms › Planful vs Fathom
FP&A platforms · October 2026 Edition

Planful vs Fathom

Two of fourteen models named Planful first on the direct prompt; zero named Fathom. Planful was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Fathom by eleven and Planful carries 60 labels and Fathom 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Planful

accepted challenger

Named in eight categories this edition.

Fathom

accepted challenger

Named in eight categories this edition.

First-choice share20%15%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate18%8%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#2A position in a field of 18; printed, not drawn.
Labels6013A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Planful reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Vena was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. Planful vs Vena · Planful vs Cube · Planful vs Abacum

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 FP&A platforms page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
PlanfulFirst choices, of fourteen modelsFathom
Direct20
Paraphrase90
Comparative00
Budget-constrained081 against Planful
Scale-constrained00
Negative0010 against Planful · 1 against Fathom
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 Planful and Fathom 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
Planful Fathom first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Planful on the left and Fathom on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Planful first, Fathom not the choice

2 of 14 modelsFathom was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GPT-5.4 miniPlanful alternatives: Pigment, Vena
Perplexity SonarAbacum, Planful alternatives: Vena, Workday Adaptive Planning

Neither was the first choice, one was named

7 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Gemini 3.5 FlashVena alternatives: Aleph, Bob Finance, Cube, Pigment, Planful
Grok 4.1 FastVena alternatives: Centage, Cube, Datarails, Planful
Mistral SmallCentage alternatives: Abacum, Drivetrain, Planful, Prophix, Vena
DeepSeek V4 FlashDatarails, Drivetrain alternatives: Cube, Jirav, Planful, Prophix, Workday Adaptive Planning
Qwen 3.7 FlashVena alternatives: Aleph, Cube, Planful
GPT-6 LunaAbacum alternatives: Planful, Vena
Muse Glimmer 30BPigment alternatives: Abacum, Aleph, Centage, Cube, Datarails, Planful, Vena

Neither was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5Aleph, Cube alternatives: Pigment, Prophix, Workday Adaptive Planning
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2Cube alternatives: Aleph, Datarails, Drivetrain, Jirav, Vena
GLM 4.7 FlashXAbacum, Drivetrain alternatives: Cube, Vena
MiniMax M2.5Vena alternatives: Drivetrain, Parse

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
Fathom leads by twenty-three points.
Fathom25%#1 of 16
Planful2%#12 of 16
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Planful leads at mid-market.
Planful20%#1 of 18
Fathom15%#2 of 18
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Planful leads by four points.
Planful4%#5 of 14
Fathom0%#– of 14
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Planful

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

“Another enterprise-grade solution that may be unnecessarily complex and expensive for smaller teams.” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“Planful, Pigment, and Oracle Essbase generated the most negative feedback overall” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“should be avoided or approached with caution... 3. Planful” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · hard negative

What the models said about Fathom

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

“users report missing features, upload/import problems, and limited customization” GPT-5.4 mini · negative prompt · soft negative
“For quick implementation: Cloud-based tools like Fathom or Finmark offer fast setup with reasonable pricing.” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Top pick for budget-conscious SMBs ... Try Fathom's free trial—it's the sweet spot for cost vs. features.” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with Syft Analytics (free tier) or Fathom (~$44/month) if you need integrated forecasting.” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
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.