Small business▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 72 → 8 of 101
IBM · 3 categories · RankedIBM Planning Analytics
78Judge labels
3First choices
18Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in FP&A platforms for enterprise buyers
Rank 20 of 99 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 9% of its 11 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of IBM Planning Analytics →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business9 of 116
4%8 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market20 of 99
0%11 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise21 of 73
0%16 labels
criticized challenger
In corporate performance ma · 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 IBM Planning Analytics 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate performance management | Planning and analysis | 0% | 20 of 99 | 9% | 11 | accepted challenger | =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% | 24 of 74 | 14% | 7 | 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. |
| Financial consolidation | Accounting and close | 0% | 79 of 102 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Prophix at 24% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, IBM Planning Analytics held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Corporate performance ma · 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 91 → 18 of 91
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 53 → 23 of 69
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate performance ma | 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 91 → 20 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 19 → 24 of 74 |
| Financial consolidation | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 79 of 102, 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 IBM Planning Analytics 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 IBM Planning Analytics 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 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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
Direct14 labelsNone
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative28 labelsNone
Budget-constrained10 labels3
Scale-constrained7 labelsNone
Negative16 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative78 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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.
“Great Entry Tier ... Small teams that want enterprise-grade capabilities at a lower entry point” DeepSeek V4 Flash · FP&A platforms · budget prompt · alternative
“OneStream and IBM Cognos TM1 are strong in financial consolidation and enterprise planning” Mistral Small · Corporate performance ma · comparative prompt · alternative
“Choose IBM Planning Analytics if your models are especially complex” Perplexity Sonar · FP&A platforms · comparative prompt · alternative
“IBM Cognos TM1 and Phocas Software are also strong contenders” Mistral Small · Corporate performance ma · direct 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.
“Avoid enterprise heavy platforms like Anaplan/OneStream/IBM Planning Analytics” Muse Glimmer 30B · FP&A platforms · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid: Starting with legacy platforms (BPC, on-prem Hyperion, old TM1)” Kimi K2 · Corporate performance ma · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as IBM Planning Analytics, over the 78 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IBM Planning Analytics was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as IBM Planning Analytics, over the 78 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IBM Planning Analytics 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 IBM Planning Analytics. 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 73 of the 78 answers that named IBM Planning Analytics and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com31
golimelight.com31
drivetrain.ai29
learn.g2.com29
cubesoftware.com27
board.com22
prophix.com22
getaleph.com19
linkedin.com19
onestream.com19
248 of the 248 domain citations in answers naming IBM Planning Analytics came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
ibm.com ranks 6 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, IBM Planning Analytics takes 0% of first choices and Planful takes 22%.ShowHide
Search and answers
ibm.com ranks 6 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, IBM Planning Analytics takes 0% of first choices and Planful takes 22%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “epm software”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “epm platforms”
6
- Searches for its name, Google
- 720 a month (“ibm planning analytics”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 26 a month
- Its company's site
- ibm.com shared with IBM's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 31,137,701 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 562,131 · 83,264 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 426,759
- Paid Google search
- 21 searches its ads show for, about 177 clicks and $2,518 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 20 of 99 in corporate performance ma
Segment leader
22%
Planful
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 78 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 73 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 IBM Planning Analytics
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as IBM Planning Analytics; a claim can dispute any of them.
IBM Cognos TM1 3IBM 2IBM Cognos TM1 / Planning Analytics 1IBM Planning Analytics (Essentials) 1IBM Planning Analytics (TM1) 1
Follow IBM Planning Analytics
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
IBM is the company behind IBM Planning Analytics.ShowHide
The company
IBM is the company behind IBM Planning Analytics.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from IBM
- IBM Apptio Cloudability, IBM Blueworks Live, IBM Cognos, IBM Cognos Analytics, IBM Cognos Controller, IBM Envizi, IBM InfoSphere Data Architect, IBM Maximo and 2 more
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- From plans to decisions with AI-powered planning and analytics powered by the IBM® TM1® engine
- For
- finance and business teams
- Price stated
- Starting at $875.00 USD ibm.com/products/planning-analytics
- Starting price
- $875.00 USD ibm.com/products/planning-analytics
- Free plan or trial
- Start free trial ibm.com/products/planning-analytics
- Integrations claimed
- 2 ibm.com/products/planning-analytics
- Customers named
- Solar Coca-ColaNovolexMinistry of Defence ServicesICBC ArgentinaJettimeSwisscomBravidaHays Germany
- Not stated on the pages read
- Certifications, hosting
What IBM Planning Analytics's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: ibm.com/products/planning-analytics, ibm.com/products/planning-analytics-saas-aws, ibm.com/case-studies/bravida-planning-analytics-cloud, ibm.com/products/planning-analytics/ai, ibm.com/products/planning-analytics/excel. 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 IBM Planning Analytics'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 IBM Planning Analytics, 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 IBM Planning Analytics by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where IBM Planning Analytics 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 IBM Planning Analytics, 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.