Expense management · October 2026 Edition
Expensify vs SAP Concur
Two of fourteen models named Expensify first on the direct prompt; two named SAP Concur. Both were named by all fourteen models and Expensify carries 64 labels and SAP Concur 45, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in five categories this edition.
Named in eight categories this edition.
First-choice share10%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate17%44%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#8A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels6445A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Expensify reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Ramp was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Ramp vs Expensify · Ramp vs SAP Concur · Zoho Expense vs Expensify
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 expense 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.
ExpensifyFirst choices, of fourteen modelsSAP Concur
Direct224 against SAP Concur
Paraphrase304 against SAP Concur
Comparative302 against SAP Concur
Budget-constrained001 against Expensify · 1 against SAP Concur
Scale-constrained001 against SAP Concur
Negative1010 against Expensify · 8 against SAP Concur
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.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Expensify and SAP Concur were named in the same answer 119 times, of the 256 answers naming Expensify and the 439 naming SAP Concur. In those answers SAP Concur took the first choice twenty-two times and Expensify eleven.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Expensify and SAP Concur 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 | | | | | |
Expensify SAP Concur first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Expensify on the left and SAP Concur on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Expensify and SAP Concur stood in it.
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.MiniMax M2.5Expensify, Rippling Spend, SAP Concur alternatives: Airwallex, BILL Spend & Expense, Navan, Paylocity, Ramp
Expensify first, SAP Concur not the choice
1 of 14 modelsSAP Concur was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Kimi K2Expensify, Ramp alternatives: Brex, Emburse
SAP Concur first, Expensify not the choice
1 of 14 modelsExpensify was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Muse Glimmer 30BNavan, SAP Concur alternatives: Airbase, Paylocity, Rippling Spend, Rydoo
Neither was the first choice, one was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniRippling Spend alternatives: Brex, Navan, Payhawk, Ramp, SAP Concur
Perplexity SonarPayhawk alternatives: BILL Spend & Expense, Expensify, Procurify, SAP Concur
Grok 4.1 FastNavan alternatives: Expensify, Rippling Spend
Qwen 3.7 FlashBrex, Ramp alternatives: BILL Spend & Expense, Expensify, Rydoo
GLM 4.7 FlashXAirbase, Ramp alternatives: Expensify, Rippling Spend, SAP Concur, Zoho Expense
GPT-6 LunaRamp alternatives: Brex, Navan, SAP Concur
Neither was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Ramp, Spendesk alternatives: Airbase, BILL Spend & Expense, Brex, Navan
Gemini 3.5 FlashRamp alternatives: Airbase, Brex, Navan, Rippling Spend
Mistral SmallAirbase alternatives: BILL Spend & Expense, Eco, Ramp
DeepSeek V4 FlashAirbase, Ramp alternatives: Brex, Payhawk
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
Expensify leads by nineteen points.
Expensify19%#3 of 8SAP Concur0%#8 of 8Mid-marketThe figures above
Expensify leads by six points.
Expensify10%#3 of 11SAP Concur4%#8 of 11Enterprise
The order flips: SAP Concur leads at enterprise.
SAP Concur68%#1 of 10Expensify2%#5 of 10What the models said about Expensify
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“criticized for complex and unintuitive interfaces, unexpected fees, unreliable credit card syncing, and poor customer support” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“Came under fire for receipt scanning methodology using third-party ML services... recurring technical and syncing problems” MiniMax M2.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Expensify | Small to mid-sized businesses, SMBs, distributed teams | $5/user/month ... Simple onboarding, fast expense submission, excellent value for money” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · first choice
“### 1. Expensify (Best All-Rounder) ... Choose Expensify if: You want the safest bet with the widest range of accounting software connections.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend Expensify as the default choice if you want a strong balance of ease of use, automation, and cost” Perplexity Sonar · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about SAP Concur
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.
“Cautions: Slow OCR, rigid workflows, and approver experience issues are common in larger enterprise rollouts.” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · hard negative
“SAP Concur - has an outdated and unintuitive user interface, complex and time-consuming expense submission.” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · hard negative
“Choose SAP Concur / Navan for large, international B2B with travel + expense integration and strict compliance.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Ramp vs ExpensifyRamp vs SAP ConcurZoho Expense vs ExpensifyZoho Expense vs SAP ConcurExpensify vs BILL Spend & ExpenseExpensify vs BrexExpensify vs NavanExpensify vs Rippling SpendBILL Spend & Expense vs SAP ConcurBrex vs SAP ConcurNavan vs SAP ConcurRippling Spend vs SAP ConcurAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full expense management 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.