Small business▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 14 → 8 of 103
8 categories · RankedDatarails
323Judge labels
34First choices
55Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
8Categories
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 Financial modeling for mid-market buyers
Rank 4 of 77 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
6 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 20 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Datarails →By buyer segmentStrongest at mid-market.
Small business8 of 106
3%17 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market4 of 77
11%20 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise74 of 125
0%9 labels
under the label threshold
In financial modeling · 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 Datarails 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial modeling and scenario planning | Planning and analysis | 11% | 4 of 77 | 0% | 20 | accepted challenger | ▼−9Since September 2026: 19% → 11%, −9 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Corporate performance management | Planning and analysis | 7% | 6 of 99 | 26% | 19 | criticized challenger | ▲+8Since September 2026: 0% → 8%, +8 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial reporting and dashboards | Planning and analysis | 4% | 5 of 105 | 0% | 20 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Board and investor reporting | Planning and analysis | 4% | 7 of 99 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by OnBoard at 26% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| FP&A platforms | Planning and analysis | 2% | 14 of 74 | 26% | 39 | criticized challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial consolidation | Accounting and close | 2% | 11 of 102 | 10% | 10 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial close management | Accounting and close | 0% | 15 of 85 | 0% | 8 | under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 55% | =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% | 30 of 101 | 17% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by Agicap at 13% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Datarails held within the floor in all eight categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Financial modeling · by segment
Mid-market▼−9Since September 2026: 19% → 11%, −9 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
11%from 19% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 1 pointRank 1 → 4 of 75
Enterprise=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 15 → 64 of 111
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial modeling | 19% | 11% | ▼−9Since September 2026: 19% → 11%, −9 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 → 4 of 77 |
| Corporate performance ma | 0% | 8% | ▲+8Since September 2026: 0% → 8%, +8 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 19 → 6 of 99 |
| Financial consolidation | 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 16 → 11 of 102 |
| FP&A platforms | 4% | 2% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 14 of 74 |
| Financial reporting | 4% | 2% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 7 → 5 of 105 |
| Board | 2% | 4% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 7 of 99, unchanged |
| Financial close manageme | 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 11 → 15 of 85 |
| 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 34 → 30 of 101 |
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 Datarails 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 Datarails 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 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 10 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 14 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 11 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 13 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 8 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 11 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 9 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 11 |
| Kimi K2 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 12 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 7 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 11 |
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
Direct76 labels18
Paraphrase48 labels9
Comparative52 labels10not counted in share
Budget-constrained41 labels3
Scale-constrained50 labels4
Negative56 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative323 labels in all, every segment counted; 34 of the 45 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.
“I would choose Datarails for an Excel-heavy mid-market B2B finance team, and Limelight for a team that wants a more modern standalone modeling platform” Perplexity Sonar · Financial modeling · direct prompt · first choice
“"For most mid-market finance teams, especially those managing multiple entities in Excel, Datarails is the best financial modeling software in 2026."” Muse Glimmer 30B · Financial modeling · direct prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market finance teams, especially those managing multiple entities in Excel, Datarails is the best financial modeling software in 2026.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Financial modeling · direct prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend Datarails as a strong starting point in the Corporate Performance Management (CPM) or FP&A platform space.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Corporate performance ma · paraphrase 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.
“Excel-based tools (e.g., Vena, Datarails): Lack enterprise scalability—avoid for large orgs.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Corporate performance ma · negative prompt · hard negative
“What to Avoid on a Tight Budget ... Datarails: Starts at ~$24,000 $40,000/year” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Financial consolidation · budget prompt · hard negative
“often Vena/Planful/Datarails can be excellent, but they're usually better fits for teams that can support higher ... costs” GPT-5.4 mini · FP&A platforms · budget prompt · soft negative
“Avoid Excel-Native Add-Ins (e.g., Datarails, Cube, Vena) *if* you want to completely escape Excel's limitations” Gemini 3.5 Flash · FP&A platforms · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Datarails, over the 323 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Datarails was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Datarails, over the 323 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Datarails 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 Datarails. 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 303 of the 323 answers that named Datarails and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
datarails.comYour site146
drivetrain.ai125
cubesoftware.com118
g2.com113
learn.g2.com99
prophix.com73
getaleph.com71
golimelight.com63
guideflow.com59
abacum.ai58
779 of the 925 domain citations in answers naming Datarails came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
datarails.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Datarails takes 11% of first choices and Microsoft Excel takes 14%.ShowHide
Search and answers
datarails.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Datarails takes 11% of first choices and Microsoft Excel takes 14%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “modeling tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “financial modeling software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 6,600 a month (“datarails”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 134 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 18,964 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 8,711 · 106 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 3,137
- Paid Google search
- 4 searches its ads show for, about 712 clicks and $16,697 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
11%
rank 4 of 77 in financial modeling
Segment leader
14%
Microsoft Excel
- First choices
- 34 across its categories
- Named in
- 323 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 303 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 datarails.com
1,205
subdomains included
Content
488
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
1 · 437
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 348 | 23 | 2026-09-28 | Cash flow forecasting, Financial reporting | |
| Report or ebook | 43 | 2 | 2026-09-23 | ||
| Conference or event | 36 | 5 | 2026-08-10 | ||
| Comparison | 28 | 3 | 2026-08-17 | ||
| Podcast or video | 14 | 0 | 2024-10-08 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 11 | 0 | 2026-06-11 | ||
| Case study | 5 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 2 | 0 | 2026-01-19 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-28Datarails website terms of use blog
- 2026-09-23Excel and fpa automation blog
- 2026-09-232026 cfo sentiments report or ebook
- 2026-09-22Chatgpt or claude for financial data transformation blog
- 2026-09-20Build my own mcp server instead of buying blog
- 2026-09-18Do i need ai built into my fpa tool blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page datarails.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 Datarails
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Datarails; a claim can dispute any of them.
DataRails 2
Follow Datarails
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
Datarails is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Datarails is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The AI operating system for finance teams
- For
- finance teams
- Price stated
- Get a custom quote tailored to your needs. Complete cost transparency, with no consultant fees—ever. datarails.com/pricing
- Integrations claimed
- 600 datarails.com · 3 datarails.com/pricing pages disagree
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial, certifications, hosting, customers
What Datarails's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: datarails.com, datarails.com/pricing, trust.datarails.com, datarails.com/platform-financeos, datarails.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 Datarails'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 Datarails, 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 Datarails by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Datarails 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 Datarails, 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.