AI Indexes
Finance AI Index
Index › Spend and procurement › Supplier management › Tradogram vs Payhawk
Supplier management · October 2026 Edition

Tradogram vs Payhawk

Zero of fourteen models named Tradogram first on the direct prompt; three named Payhawk. Tradogram was named by eight of the fourteen models and Payhawk by eight and both carry 11 labels, so the shares below are directly comparable.

Tradogram

accepted challenger

Named in three categories this edition.

Payhawk

accepted challenger

Named in seven categories this edition.

First-choice share9%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#6A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1111Equal, which is what makes the shares comparable.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Tradogram reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Precoro was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Precoro vs Tradogram · Precoro vs Payhawk · Procurify vs Tradogram

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 supplier 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.
TradogramFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPayhawk
Direct03
Paraphrase00
Comparative00
Budget-constrained50
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
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 Tradogram and Payhawk 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
Tradogram Payhawk first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Tradogram on the left and Payhawk on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Payhawk first, Tradogram not the choice

3 of 14 modelsTradogram was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Perplexity SonarPayhawk alternatives: Precoro
MiniMax M2.5Payhawk, Precoro alternatives: Striven, Zip
Muse Glimmer 30BPayhawk, Procurify alternatives: Coupa, Gatekeeper, Kodiak Hub, Precoro

Neither was the first choice, one was named

3 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Grok 4.1 FastCoupa alternatives: Payhawk, Precoro, Procurify, SAP Ariba
Mistral SmallKodiak Hub, Procurify alternatives: Payhawk
Llama 4 MaverickPrecoro alternatives: Coupa, GEP SMART, Ivalua, Payhawk

Neither was named

8 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5Procurify alternatives: Coupa, HICX, Jaggaer, Kodiak Hub
GPT-5.4 miniCoupa, Ivalua alternatives: Oracle Fusion Cloud Procurement, SAP Ariba Supplier Risk
Gemini 3.5 FlashProcurify alternatives: ComplianceQuest, Gatekeeper, Graphite Connect, Ironclad, Kodiak Hub, Precoro, Vertice, Zip
DeepSeek V4 FlashGatekeeper alternatives: Kodiak Hub, Precoro, Procurify
Qwen 3.7 FlashCoupa alternatives: HighRadius, Ivalua, Zycus
Kimi K2Procurify alternatives: Precoro, ProcureDesk, Zip
GLM 4.7 FlashXPrecoro alternatives: Gatekeeper, Procurify, SAP Business One
GPT-6 LunaPrecoro alternatives: Kodiak Hub, Procurify

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
Tradogram leads by twenty-two points.
Tradogram24%#2 of 10
Payhawk2%#– of 10
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Tradogram leads by four points.
Tradogram9%#3 of 13
Payhawk5%#6 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Tradogram0%#– of 8
Payhawk0%#– of 8
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Tradogram

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

“Tradogram is the standout choice — it's purpose-built for procurement, has a genuinely free tier to start, and scales affordably” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Precoro and Tradogram are particularly praised for their combination of affordability” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Payhawk

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

“framed as finance-led supplier and spend workflows for mid-market finance” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“the strongest all-around choice from the results is Payhawk” Perplexity Sonar · direct 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.