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 81 → 82 of 82
22 categories · RankedHighRadius
717Judge labels
151First choices
124Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
22Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
78% in Accounts receivable auto for enterprise buyers
Rank 4 of 83 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
3 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 39% of its 51 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of HighRadius →By buyer segmentAn enterprise product: leader at enterprise, not named at small business.
Small business88 of 88
0%41 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market4 of 83
9%51 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise1 of 62
62%65 labels
endorsed leader
In cash application · 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 HighRadius 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash application | Receivables and billing | 9% | 4 of 83 | 39% | 51 | criticized challenger | ▼−6Since September 2026: 16% → 10%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Chargeback management | Receivables and billing | 6% | 8 of 81 | 18% | 11 | accepted challenger | |
| Accounts receivable automation | Receivables and billing | 6% | 8 of 79 | 33% | 39 | criticized challenger | ▼−6Since September 2026: 10% → 5%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| B2B payment acceptance | Receivables and billing | 2% | 13 of 94 | 14% | 21 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Invoicing software | Receivables and billing | 2% | 10 of 71 | 0% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by Zoho Invoice at 24% | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Embedded payments platforms | Receivables and billing | 2% | 11 of 110 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Stripe Connect at 53% | |
| Account reconciliation | Accounting and close | 2% | 10 of 82 | 6% | 17 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Global e-invoicing compliance | Tax and compliance | 2% | 13 of 136 | 0% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by Avalara E-Invoicing at 25% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Supplier management | Spend and procurement | 2% | 11 of 111 | 0% | 8 | under 10 labels · led by Precoro at 14% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Accounts payable automation | Spend and procurement | 2% | 12 of 54 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 22% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Cash flow forecasting | Treasury and cash | 0% | 25 of 101 | 0% | 17 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Treasury management systems | Treasury and cash | 0% | 29 of 124 | 0% | 9 | under 10 labels · led by Trovata at 28% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial close management | Accounting and close | 0% | 16 of 85 | 12% | 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. |
| Financial consolidation | Accounting and close | 0% | 21 of 102 | 0% | 8 | 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. |
| Business bill pay | Treasury and cash | 0% | 21 of 98 | 17% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by BILL at 32% | ▼−9Since September 2026: 9% → 0%, −9 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Internal controls and SOX | Tax and compliance | 0% | 28 of 90 | 0% | 5 | 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. |
| Cross-border payments and FX | Treasury and cash | 0% | 26 of 87 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Wise Business at 39% | =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% | 32 of 105 | 0% | 3 | 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. |
| Payment orchestration platforms | Receivables and billing | 0% | 22 of 81 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by BlueSnap at 18% | |
| AI accounting assistants | Accounting and close | 0% | 45 of 85 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Sage Intacct at 22% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Revenue recognition | Accounting and close | 0% | 53 of 77 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Maxio at 20% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Transfer pricing | Tax and compliance | 0% | 47 of 101 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by TPGenie at 30% |
Movement
Since September 2026, HighRadius held within the floor in all twenty-two categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Cash application · by segment
Mid-market▼−6Since September 2026: 16% → 10%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
10%from 16% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 1 → 2 of 79
Enterprise▲+12Since September 2026: 49% → 61%, +12 points. Past the 10-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.
61%from 49% in September 2026
Cleared the floor by 2 pointsRank 1 of 58, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business bill pay | 9% | 0% | ▼−9Since September 2026: 9% → 0%, −9 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 → 21 of 98 |
| Chargeback management | 0% | 7% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 7% now. | New this edition | Rank 8 of 81, unchanged |
| Cash application | 16% | 10% | ▼−6Since September 2026: 16% → 10%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 → 4 of 83 |
| Accounts receivable auto | 10% | 5% | ▼−6Since September 2026: 10% → 5%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 5 → 8 of 79 |
| Treasury management syst | 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 11 → 29 of 124 |
| Global e-invoicing compl | 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 22 → 13 of 136 |
| Supplier 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 38 → 11 of 111 |
| Accounts payable automat | 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 57 → 12 of 54 |
| B2B payment acceptance | 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 → 13 of 94 |
| Account reconciliation | 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 6 → 10 of 82 |
| Invoicing software | 2% | 2% | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 12 → 10 of 71 |
| Embedded payments | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 11 of 110, unchanged |
| 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 23 → 25 of 101 |
| 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 13 → 16 of 85 |
| 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 22 → 21 of 102 |
| 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 31 → 28 of 90 |
| Cross-border payments | 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 → 26 of 87 |
| 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 35 → 32 of 105 |
| Payment orchestration | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 22 of 81, unchanged |
| AI accounting assistants | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 45 of 85, unchanged |
| Revenue recognition | 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 52 → 53 of 77 |
| Transfer pricing | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 47 of 101, 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 HighRadius 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 HighRadius 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 | 4 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 20 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 3 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 12 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 2 | 9 | 2 | 7 | 20 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 3 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 16 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 21 |
| Mistral Small | 2 | 3 | 7 | 2 | 14 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 4 | 3 | 6 | 10 | 23 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 2 | 4 | 9 | 0 | 15 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
| Kimi K2 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 15 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 3 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 18 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 15 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 18 |
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
Direct174 labels60
Paraphrase153 labels65
Comparative161 labels49not counted in share
Budget-constrained63 labels17
Scale-constrained89 labels9
Negative77 labels7not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative717 labels in all, every segment counted; 151 of the 207 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.
“1. HighRadius - Offers AI-powered supplier onboarding automation with a self-service vendor portal, dynamic workflows, in-depth compliance checks, and ERP integration.” Llama 4 Maverick · Supplier management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For mid-market organizations, HighRadius delivers out-of-the-box automation to unify cash application... achieving up to 90%+ touchless cash application” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Cash application · direct prompt · first choice
“Leader in Gartner Magic Quadrant for Invoice-to-Cash (3x recognized); best for mid-market to enterprise with high-volume, complex global AR” Grok 4.1 Fast · Cash application · comparative prompt · first choice
“the strongest default choice is usually HighRadius if your priority is *high-volume, complex cash application with automation depth*” Perplexity Sonar · Cash application · direct 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 HighRadius, Esker, and most of Billtrust/BlackLine unless your payment volume or audit requirements genuinely justify enterprise pricing."” Muse Glimmer 30B · Cash application · negative prompt · hard negative
“Some sources advise negotiating carefully or avoiding standard contracts with HighRadius, especially for smaller businesses” Mistral Small · Cash application · negative prompt · hard negative
“Several sources explicitly suggest negotiating carefully or avoiding standard contracts from HighRadius.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Cash application · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Enterprise-Only Tools: High-end solutions like HighRadius... generally overkill for small budgets” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Cash application · budget prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as HighRadius, over the 717 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HighRadius was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as HighRadius, over the 717 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HighRadius 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 HighRadius. 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 691 of the 717 answers that named HighRadius and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
highradius.comYour site490
bluecopa.com203
worldmetrics.org164
g2.com163
chaserhq.com157
upflow.io148
gitnux.org138
guideflow.com135
learn.g2.com118
stuut.ai103
1,329 of the 1,819 domain citations in answers naming HighRadius came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
highradius.com ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, HighRadius takes 9% of first choices and Versapay takes 9%.ShowHide
Search and answers
highradius.com ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, HighRadius takes 9% of first choices and Versapay takes 9%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “cash application tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “cash application software”
1
- Searches for its name, Google
- 6,600 a month (“highradius”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 118 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 294,561 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 34,435 · 4,330 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 4,804
- Paid Google search
- 6 searches its ads show for, about 28 clicks and $2,272 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
9%
rank 4 of 83 in cash application
Segment leader
9%
Versapay
- First choices
- 151 across its categories
- Named in
- 717 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 691 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 highradius.com
4,525
subdomains included
Content
2,560
counted in the table below
Documentation
6
Product · Integration
299 · 23
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 1,404 | 0 | 2026-05-19 | Cash application, Cash flow forecasting | |
| Report or ebook | 424 | 2 | 2026-09-25 | Cash application, Cash flow forecasting | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 147 | 1 | 2026-07-08 | Cash application, Cash flow forecasting | |
| Case study | 143 | 0 | 2026-05-21 | Account reconciliation | |
| Template or tool | 111 | 0 | 2024-12-04 | Cash application, Accounts receivable auto | |
| Glossary or explainer | 91 | 0 | 2025-05-26 | Treasury management syst, ERP systems | |
| Comparison | 83 | 0 | 2026-03-17 | Accounting software, Financial close manageme | |
| News or press | 81 | 0 | 2026-02-27 | Cash application | |
| Podcast or video | 57 | 2 | 2026-07-29 | ||
| Conference or event | 19 | 0 | 2025-04-17 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-25Real world payment scenarios in cash application report or ebook
- 2026-09-23Global e invoicing mandates 2026 report or ebook
- 2026-07-29Credit management system explained podcast or video
- 2026-07-15Chai corner chat podcast or video
- 2026-07-08The cios journey from information to intelligence webinar or virtual event
- 2026-06-23Accounts payable application gartner challenger report or ebook
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page highradius.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 HighRadius
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as HighRadius; a claim can dispute any of them.
HighRadius Treasury 2HighRadius (Autonomous Accounting) 1HighRadius (Mid-Market Edition) 1HighRadius (RadiusOne Suite) 1
Follow HighRadius
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
HighRadius is its own company.ShowHide
The company
HighRadius is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Autonomous Finance for O2C, Treasury & R2R
- For
- The Office Of The CFO
- Price stated
- Now Pay Only For The Business Outcomes highradius.com
- Starting price
- $0 highradius.com
- Integrations claimed
- 50 highradius.com
- Certifications
- Global PCI DSSISO/IEC 27001:2022SOC 1 Type 2SOC 2 Type 2SOC 3TX-RAMPEU-US DPFGDPR
- Customers named
- Coca-Cola Bottlers (CCBSSS)L'OréalDXPDanone North AmericaSiemens Healthineers AGKonica Minolta Business Solutions, U.S.A., Inc.Russell Stover Candies Inc.QuVa Pharma, Inc. - USA
- Not stated on the pages read
- Free plan or trial, hosting
What HighRadius's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: highradius.com, highradius.com/pricing, trust.highradius.com, highradius.com/product, highradius.com/resources/customers. 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 HighRadius'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 HighRadius, 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 HighRadius by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where HighRadius 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 HighRadius, 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.