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 71 → 93 of 94
CSC · 1 category · RankedCSC Entity Management
111Judge labels
6First choices
44Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
11% in Entity management for enterprise buyers
Rank 16 of 81 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 44% of its 39 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of CSC Entity Management →By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
Small business98 of 99
0%20 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market16 of 81
2%39 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise3 of 89
11%52 labels
criticized challenger
In entity management · 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 CSC Entity Management 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entity management | Equity and corporate | 2% | 16 of 81 | 44% | 39 | criticized challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, CSC Entity Management held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Entity management · by segment
Mid-market▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 27 → 14 of 79
Enterprise▼−5Since September 2026: 11% → 5%, −5 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
5%from 11% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 3 of 77, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entity management | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 27 → 16 of 81 |
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 CSC Entity Management 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 CSC Entity Management 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
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
Direct16 labels1
Paraphrase11 labels1
Comparative25 labels3not counted in share
Budget-constrained14 labels4
Scale-constrained13 labelsNone
Negative32 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative111 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 9 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.
“Choose CSC if you want deep corporate recordkeeping, compliance, and entity-specific workflow control.” GPT-5.4 mini · Entity management · comparative prompt · first choice
“Diligent Entities and CSC Entity Management are frequently recommended due to their scalability” Mistral Small · Entity management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Diligent Entities or CSC provide the deepest enterprise governance and compliance capabilities” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Entity management · comparative prompt · first choice
“Enterprise-grade, often bundled with registered agent services; quote-based pricing; strong for multinational compliance” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Entity management · scale prompt · alternative
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.
“"large enterprises should be cautious about or avoid the following types of entity management tools: 1. Heavy Corporate Services Firms (e.g., CSC Global, Intertrust, Computershare)"” Muse Glimmer 30B · Entity management · negative prompt · hard negative
“"Avoid or proceed with extreme caution with CSC Entity Management given its poor reviews and documented issues with invoicing, missed filings, and unresponsive support."” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Entity management · negative prompt · hard negative
“Poor user reviews; documented issues with invoicing, missed filings, and unresponsive support. One analysis flagged it as a "hard negative" recommendation.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Entity management · negative prompt · hard negative
“This tool has received poor reviews and has been known to have issues with invoicing, missed filings, and unresponsive support.” Llama 4 Maverick · Entity management · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CSC Entity Management, over the 109 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CSC Entity Management was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CSC Entity Management, over the 109 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CSC Entity Management 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 CSC Entity Management. 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 109 of the 109 answers that named CSC Entity Management and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
discern.com53
g2.com52
diligent.com42
techbullion.com42
sourceforge.net40
worldmetrics.org40
cscglobal.comYour site39
itechguides.com37
getapp.com36
finance-ai-index.com34
376 of the 415 domain citations in answers naming CSC Entity Management came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
cscglobal.com ranks 2 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, CSC Entity Management takes 2% of first choices and Athennian takes 41%.ShowHide
Search and answers
cscglobal.com ranks 2 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, CSC Entity Management takes 2% of first choices and Athennian takes 41%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “entity management tools”
2
Position for “legal entity management software”
3
- Searches for its name, Google
- 110 a month (“csc entity management”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 2 a month
- Its company's site
- cscglobal.com shared with CSC's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 100,643 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 4,195 · 725 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 3,558
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 2 clicks and $72 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 16 of 81 in entity management
Segment leader
41%
Athennian
- First choices
- 6 across its categories
- Named in
- 109 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 109 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.
Names read as CSC Entity Management
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as CSC Entity Management; a claim can dispute any of them.
CSC 8CSC Global 3CSC (Corporation Service Company) 1CSC Entity Management / CT Corporation 1CSC Entity Management / Global Subsidiary Management 1CSC Global (and CT Corporation) 1CT Corporation / CSC Global 1
Follow CSC Entity Management
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
CSC is the company behind CSC Entity Management.ShowHide
The company
CSC is the company behind CSC Entity Management.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from CSC
- CSC / CT Corporation, CSC Corptax, CSC Corptax AIT
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 CSC Entity Management'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 CSC Entity Management, 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 CSC Entity Management by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where CSC Entity Management 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 CSC Entity Management, 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.