Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 55 → 79 of 79
9 categories · RankedAnaplan
534Judge labels
82First choices
236Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
9Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
57% in Financial modeling for enterprise buyers
Rank 74 of 74 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 49% of its 53 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Anaplan →By buyer segmentAn enterprise product: leader at enterprise, not named at small business or mid-market.
Small business80 of 80
0%37 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market74 of 74
0%53 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise1 of 57
53%75 labels
endorsed leader
In fp&a platforms · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Anaplan for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FP&A platforms | Planning and analysis | 0% | 74 of 74 | 49% | 53 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Corporate performance management | Planning and analysis | 0% | 99 of 99 | 55% | 49 | criticized challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial modeling and scenario planning | Planning and analysis | 0% | 77 of 77 | 75% | 24 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Cash flow forecasting | Treasury and cash | 0% | 97 of 101 | 47% | 15 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial consolidation | Accounting and close | 0% | 33 of 102 | 14% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Prophix at 24% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial reporting and dashboards | Planning and analysis | 0% | 58 of 105 | 33% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by Sage Intacct at 33% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Board and investor reporting | Planning and analysis | 0% | 41 of 99 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by OnBoard at 26% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Financial close management | Accounting and close | 0% | 45 of 85 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 55% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Rebate management | Receivables and billing | 0% | 48 of 80 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Enable at 52% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Anaplan held within the floor in all nine categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · FP&A platforms · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 50 → 73 of 73
Enterprise▲+4Since September 2026: 48% → 51%, +4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
51%from 48% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 1 of 54, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate performance ma | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 16 → 99 of 99 |
| FP&A platforms | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 50 → 74 of 74 |
| Financial modeling | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 113 → 77 of 77 |
| Cash flow forecasting | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 24 → 97 of 101 |
| Financial consolidation | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 45 → 33 of 102 |
| Financial reporting | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 100 → 58 of 105 |
| Board | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 41 of 99, unchanged |
| Financial close manageme | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 45 of 85, unchanged |
| Rebate management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 48 of 80, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 10 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Anaplan across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Anaplan across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 7 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 12 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9 | 12 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 6 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 14 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 10 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 17 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 9 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 2 | 3 | 11 | 17 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 11 | 14 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 14 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 10 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct92 labels35
Paraphrase84 labels26
Comparative93 labels9not counted in share
Budget-constrained76 labels12
Scale-constrained82 labels9
Negative107 labels4not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative534 labels in all, every segment counted; 82 of the 95 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Strongest fit for cross-functional, multi-entity, real-time planning at scale.” Perplexity Sonar · FP&A platforms · comparative prompt · first choice
“switch to Python/R or FP&A platforms (e.g., Anaplan) for audits/large data” Grok 4.1 Fast · Financial modeling · negative prompt · first choice
“Oracle and Anaplan are top choices for large, complex organizations” Mistral Small · Corporate performance ma · comparative prompt · first choice
“Anaplan is the market leader in "connected planning."” Qwen 3.7 Flash · FP&A platforms · comparative prompt · first choice
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
“Avoid enterprise heavy platforms like Anaplan/OneStream/IBM Planning Analytics unless you have a dedicated model builder and >12-month implementation runway.” Muse Glimmer 30B · FP&A platforms · negative prompt · hard negative
“High Caution (Consistent Negative Sentiment Across Sources): Anaplan ... "avoid unless you have a dedicated procurement team"; steep learning curve” Grok 4.1 Fast · FP&A platforms · negative prompt · hard negative
“"you generally want to avoid heavy enterprise platforms like Anaplan or Oracle [which cost tens of thousands annually]"” Muse Glimmer 30B · Corporate performance ma · negative prompt · hard negative
“it is recommended to avoid defaulting to Anaplan if cost predictability across thousands of users is a top priority” Llama 4 Maverick · Corporate performance ma · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Anaplan, over the 534 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Anaplan was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Anaplan, over the 534 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Anaplan was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Anaplan. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 491 of the 534 answers that named Anaplan and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
drivetrain.ai236
cubesoftware.com164
g2.com132
learn.g2.com120
prophix.com113
golimelight.com111
datarails.com108
getaleph.com108
resources.rework.com92
cfoshortlist.com86
1,270 of the 1,270 domain citations in answers naming Anaplan came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
anaplan.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Anaplan takes 0% of first choices and Planful takes 20%.ShowHide
Search and answers
anaplan.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Anaplan takes 0% of first choices and Planful takes 20%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “fp&a software”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “fp&a platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 18,100 a month (“anaplan”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 532 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 78,179 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 5,470 · 815 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 5,421
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 74 of 74 in FP&A platforms
Segment leader
20%
Planful
- First choices
- 82 across its categories
- Named in
- 534 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 491 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on anaplan.com
5,353
subdomains included
Content
1,984
counted in the table below
Documentation
3,129
Product · Integration
126 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 732 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 643 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 204 | undated | |||
| Case study | 196 | undated | |||
| News or press | 167 | 1 | 2026-09-23 | ||
| Podcast or video | 14 | undated | |||
| Conference or event | 13 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 12 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 2 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-23Blue owl executive perspectives future enterprise software anaplan news or press
- 2026-06-03How bazookas cio is bringing ai to the gum game and navigating candy industry headwinds news or press
- 2026-05-18Ai enterprise software deterministic domain authority saas split news or press
- 2026-05-12Bazookas big pop transitioning legacy systems predictive analytics news or press
- 2026-02-02Coworking with jim freeze news or press
- 2026-01-20Jim freeze anaplan proving marketings impact news or press
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page anaplan.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Anaplan
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Anaplan; a claim can dispute any of them.
Anaplan/Planful 1Oracle PBCS/Anaplan 1
Follow Anaplan
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Anaplan is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Anaplan is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The scenario planning and analysis platform where AI, data, and planning converge to make the right decisions, right now.
- For
- Agentic Enterprises
- Certifications
- SOC 1 Type 2, SOC 2 Type 2ISO-27001, 27017, 27018, 27701, & 42001CSA Trusted Cloud ProviderCSA STAR Level 1Cyber EssentialsENS (Esquema Nacional de Seguridad)APEC CBPRsTRUSTe International Privacy Verified
- Customers named
- JLRLinkedInThe Coca-Cola CompanyUnilever International GroupGeneraliJaguar Land RoverBayer Consumer HealthAutodesk
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, hosting
What Anaplan's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: anaplan.com, trust.anaplan.com, anaplan.com/platform, anaplan.com/customers, anaplan.com/partners. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Anaplan's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Anaplan, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Anaplan by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Anaplan is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Anaplan, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.