Small business▲+8Since September 2026: 8% → 16%, +8 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
16%from 8% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 2 pointsRank 4 → 1 of 103
15 categories · RankedGoogle Sheets
114Judge labels
20First choices
65Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
15Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
19% in Financial modeling for small business buyers
Rank 5 of 77 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 15% of its 13 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Google Sheets →By buyer segmentStrongest at small business.
Small business1 of 106
19%15 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market5 of 77
9%13 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise118 of 125
0%2 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 Google Sheets 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 | 9% | 5 of 77 | 15% | 13 | accepted challenger | ▼−6Since September 2026: 13% → 7%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Cash flow forecasting | Treasury and cash | 0% | 92 of 101 | 50% | 4 | 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. |
| Corporate performance management | Planning and analysis | 0% | 79 of 99 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Planful at 22% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Financial reporting and dashboards | Planning and analysis | 0% | 87 of 105 | 50% | 2 | 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. |
| FP&A platforms | Planning and analysis | 0% | 29 of 74 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Planful at 20% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Account reconciliation | Accounting and close | 0% | 79 of 82 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 33% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Accounting software | Accounting and close | 0% | 46 of 55 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Sage Intacct at 44% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Board and investor reporting | Planning and analysis | 0% | 88 of 99 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by OnBoard at 26% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Entity management | Equity and corporate | 0% | 69 of 81 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Athennian at 41% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| ESG and carbon reporting | Equity and corporate | 0% | 83 of 110 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Greenly at 36% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Fixed asset accounting | Accounting and close | 0% | 102 of 107 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Sage Fixed Assets at 34% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Internal controls and SOX | Tax and compliance | 0% | 83 of 90 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 25% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Lease accounting | Accounting and close | 0% | 68 of 71 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by FinQuery at 29% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| SaaS metrics and analytics | Planning and analysis | 0% | 31 of 78 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by ChartMogul at 49% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Supplier management | Spend and procurement | 0% | 75 of 111 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Precoro at 14% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Google Sheets held within the floor in all fifteen categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Financial modeling · by segment
Mid-market▼−6Since September 2026: 13% → 7%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
7%from 13% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 2 → 6 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 70 → 104 of 111
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial modeling | 13% | 7% | ▼−6Since September 2026: 13% → 7%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 2 → 5 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 44 → 92 of 101 |
| Corporate performance ma | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 79 of 99, unchanged |
| 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 125 → 87 of 105 |
| 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 26 → 29 of 74 |
| Account reconciliation | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 79 of 82, unchanged |
| Accounting software | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 46 of 55, unchanged |
| Board | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 88 of 99, unchanged |
| Entity management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 69 of 81, unchanged |
| ESG and carbon reporting | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 83 of 110, unchanged |
| Fixed asset accounting | 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 88 → 102 of 107 |
| Internal controls | 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 65 → 83 of 90 |
| Lease accounting | 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 53 → 68 of 71 |
| SaaS metrics | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 31 of 78, unchanged |
| Supplier management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 75 of 111, 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 Google Sheets 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 Google Sheets 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 10 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
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
Direct2 labels1
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative2 labelsNone
Budget-constrained41 labels19
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative66 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative114 labels in all, every segment counted; 20 of the 20 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.
“starting with Google Sheets or Excel and upgrading to a dedicated tool ... is the most cost-effective approach” Kimi K2 · Financial modeling · budget prompt · first choice
“Best low-budget choice: Google Sheets for a small company building budgets, forecasts, and scenario models” GPT-6 Luna · Financial modeling · budget prompt · first choice
“start with Microsoft Excel or Google Sheets if you need a simple, flexible solution” Mistral Small · Financial modeling · budget prompt · first choice
“the best financial modeling software is typically Google Sheets (completely free)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Financial modeling · budget 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.
“"Spreadsheets like Excel and Google Sheets are brilliant tools... Where they become dangerous is when temporary spreadsheets slowly turn into permanent business systems"” Muse Glimmer 30B · Financial reporting · negative prompt · hard negative
“The "Spreadsheet Trap" (Excel or Google Sheets)... Why to avoid: Research shows that up to 88% of spreadsheets used for asset tracking contain major data errors.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Fixed asset accounting · negative prompt · hard negative
“Many finance teams rely on complex, custom Excel or Google Sheets templates as their primary "reconciliation tool"... Why to avoid” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Account reconciliation · negative prompt · hard negative
“Spreadsheets (Microsoft Excel / Google Sheets) as Primary Ledgers ... should be avoided as a primary bookkeeping tool” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Accounting software · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Google Sheets, over the 114 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Sheets was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Google Sheets, over the 114 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Sheets 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 Google Sheets. 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 100 of the 114 answers that named Google Sheets and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
worldmetrics.org23
cubesoftware.com21
drivetrain.ai20
g2.com19
guideflow.com18
reddit.com18
datarails.com16
gitnux.org16
sourceforge.net16
itechguides.com15
182 of the 182 domain citations in answers naming Google Sheets came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
google.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Google Sheets takes 9% of first choices and Microsoft Excel takes 14%.ShowHide
Search and answers
google.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Google Sheets takes 9% 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
- 3,350,000 a month (“google sheets”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 53,730 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 1,800,358,416 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 16,240,774 · 2,471,277 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 28,655,444
- Paid Google search
- 243 searches its ads show for, about 42,266 clicks and $465,944 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
9%
rank 5 of 77 in financial modeling
Segment leader
14%
Microsoft Excel
- First choices
- 20 across its categories
- Named in
- 114 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 100 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 google.com
7,607
subdomains included
Content
1,201
counted in the table below
Documentation
137
Product · Integration
18 · 84
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case study | 707 | undated | |||
| Blog | 372 | 0 | 2018-12-13 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 51 | 0 | 2018-12-13 | ||
| Comparison | 35 | undated | |||
| News or press | 34 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2018-12-13Best practices for in app rewarded video ads blog
- 2018-12-13How to monetize your mobile apps with ads blog
- 2018-12-13What is AdMob - Google AdMob glossary or explainer
- 2018-11-19App marketing strategies to grow and monetize your app blog
- 2018-11-19How much revenue can you earn from admob blog
- 2018-11-19How to earn money with in app advertising blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page google.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. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Google Sheets
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Google Sheets; a claim can dispute any of them.
Google Looker Studio (formerly Data Studio) + Google Sheets 1Google Sheets/Excel Templates 1Google Sheets/Notion templates 1
Follow Google Sheets
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
Google Sheets is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Google Sheets is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Collaborative, AI-powered spreadsheets
- Customers named
- Globe TelecomUltraEtsyAdore MeRobinhoodAttache
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Google Sheets's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: workspace.google.com/products/sheets, google.com, google.com/adwords/express/pricing, google.com/admob/platform.html. 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 Google Sheets'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 Google Sheets, 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 Google Sheets by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Google Sheets 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 Google Sheets, 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.