AI Indexes
Finance AI Index
Index › Treasury and cash › Cash flow forecasting › Agicap vs Tesorio
Cash flow forecasting · October 2026 Edition

Agicap vs Tesorio

Three of fourteen models named Agicap first on the direct prompt; three named Tesorio. Agicap was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Tesorio by eleven and Agicap carries 25 labels and Tesorio 20, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Agicap

accepted challenger

Named in three categories this edition.

Tesorio

accepted challenger

Named in seven categories this edition.

First-choice share13%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate4%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#5A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels2520A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Agicap reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Cube was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Agicap vs Float · Agicap vs Cash Flow Frog · Agicap vs Chaser

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 cash flow forecasting page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
AgicapFirst choices, of fourteen modelsTesorio
Direct33
Paraphrase40
Comparative00
Budget-constrained00
Scale-constrained00
Negative001 against Agicap
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 Agicap and Tesorio 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
Agicap Tesorio first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Agicap on the left and Tesorio on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Agicap first, Tesorio an alternative

3 of 14 modelsTesorio was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GPT-5.4 miniAgicap alternatives: Datarails, Kyriba, Vena
Perplexity SonarAgicap alternatives: Chaser, Cube, Upflow
Qwen 3.7 FlashAgicap alternatives: Chaser, Cube, Tesorio

Tesorio first, Agicap an alternative

3 of 14 modelsAgicap was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Gemini 3.5 FlashTesorio alternatives: Agicap, Centime, Cube, Nilus, Trovata
DeepSeek V4 FlashTesorio alternatives: Agicap, Chaser, Float, Vena
Muse Glimmer 30BTesorio, Upflow alternatives: Abacum, Float, Planful

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.
Claude Haiku 4.5Upflow alternatives: Abacum, Chaser, Cube, Tesorio
Mistral SmallChaser, Cube alternatives: Prophix One, Tesorio
GPT-6 LunaCentime alternatives: Cube, Jirav, Planful, Tesorio

Neither was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Grok 4.1 FastChaser alternatives: Drivetrain, Float, Jirav
Llama 4 MaverickCube
Kimi K2Chaser alternatives: Abacum, Cube, Fathom, Upflow
GLM 4.7 FlashXCube alternatives: Abacum, HighRadius
MiniMax M2.5Upflow alternatives: Chaser, Drivetrain, Vena

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
Agicap leads by two points.
Agicap4%#6 of 12
Tesorio2%#– of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Agicap leads by eight points.
Agicap13%#1 of 15
Tesorio6%#5 of 15
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Tesorio leads at enterprise.
Tesorio16%#2 of 12
Agicap0%#– of 12
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Agicap

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

“Agicap has a lack of detailed KPIs tracking, complex initial setup, and is limited to treasury management only” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Agicap is currently widely regarded as a market leader for mid-market finance teams (scoring highest in recent industry analyses for cash flow forecasting)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Tesorio

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

“Tesorio is consistently positioned as the AR-native cash forecasting platform for B2B SaaS and mid-market finance teams.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“Best for: B2B SaaS and services companies ($20M to $1B ARR) where customer collections dictate liquidity.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Agicap vs FloatAgicap vs Cash Flow FrogAgicap vs ChaserAgicap vs CubeAgicap vs TrovataAgicap vs KyribaFloat vs TesorioCash Flow Frog vs TesorioChaser vs TesorioTesorio vs CubeTesorio vs TrovataTesorio vs KyribaAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full cash flow forecasting 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.