Small business▲+5Since September 2026: 10% → 16%, +5 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
16%from 10% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 2 of 77, unchanged
QuickBooks · 16 categories · RankedQuickBooks Online
679Judge labels
139First choices
142Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
16Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
53% in Accounting software for small business buyers
Rank 5 of 77 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 41% of its 17 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of QuickBooks Online →By buyer segmentStrongest at small business.
Small business2 of 79
14%42 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market5 of 77
8%17 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise65 of 65
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
In revenue recognition · 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 QuickBooks Online 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue recognition | Accounting and close | 8% | 5 of 77 | 41% | 17 | criticized challenger | ▲+3Since September 2026: 6% → 9%, +3 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Account reconciliation | Accounting and close | 8% | 5 of 82 | 15% | 20 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 10% → 9%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AI accounting assistants | Accounting and close | 2% | 9 of 85 | 14% | 42 | accepted challenger | ▲+3Since September 2026: 0% → 3%, +3 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Cash application | Receivables and billing | 2% | 22 of 83 | 33% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Versapay at 9% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial reporting and dashboards | Planning and analysis | 2% | 10 of 105 | 15% | 26 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Supplier management | Spend and procurement | 2% | 14 of 111 | 0% | 5 | 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. |
| Accounting software | Accounting and close | 0% | 10 of 55 | 40% | 43 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Global e-invoicing compliance | Tax and compliance | 0% | 22 of 136 | 6% | 18 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Accounts receivable automation | Receivables and billing | 0% | 69 of 79 | 40% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by Upflow at 17% | =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% | 83 of 102 | 40% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by Prophix at 24% | ▼−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% | 58 of 85 | 33% | 3 | 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. |
| Corporate tax provision | Tax and compliance | 0% | 86 of 102 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE Tax Provision at 21% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Crypto accounting | Accounting and close | 0% | 23 of 54 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Bitwave at 27% | |
| FP&A platforms | Planning and analysis | 0% | 62 of 74 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Planful at 20% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Business bill pay | Treasury and cash | 0% | 48 of 98 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by BILL at 32% | =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% | 99 of 124 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Trovata at 28% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, QuickBooks Online held within the floor in all sixteen categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Revenue recognition · by segment
Mid-market▲+3Since September 2026: 6% → 9%, +3 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
9%from 6% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 5 → 4 of 74
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 56 → 62 of 62
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue recognition | 6% | 9% | ▲+3Since September 2026: 6% → 9%, +3 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 5 of 77, unchanged |
| AI accounting assistants | 0% | 3% | ▲+3Since September 2026: 0% → 3%, +3 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 15 → 9 of 85 |
| Financial consolidation | 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 10 → 83 of 102 |
| Cash application | 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 12 → 22 of 83 |
| 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 44 → 14 of 111 |
| Account reconciliation | 10% | 9% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 10% → 9%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 5 of 82 |
| Financial reporting | 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 14 → 10 of 105 |
| Accounting software | 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 12 → 10 of 55 |
| Global e-invoicing compl | 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 24 → 22 of 136 |
| Accounts receivable auto | 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 → 69 of 79 |
| 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 29 → 58 of 85 |
| Corporate tax provision | 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 → 86 of 102 |
| Crypto accounting | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 23 of 54, unchanged |
| FP&A platforms | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 62 of 74, unchanged |
| Business bill pay | 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 55 → 48 of 98 |
| Treasury management syst | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 99 of 124, 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 QuickBooks Online 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 QuickBooks Online 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 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 11 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 4 | 2 | 9 | 16 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 5 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 16 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 4 | 7 | 9 | 22 |
| Mistral Small | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 13 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 2 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 16 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 9 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 11 | 4 | 5 | 22 |
| Kimi K2 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 2 | 16 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 12 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 13 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 3 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 8 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 14 |
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
Direct109 labels50
Paraphrase111 labels45
Comparative116 labels59not counted in share
Budget-constrained184 labels37
Scale-constrained34 labels7
Negative125 labels19not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative679 labels in all, every segment counted; 139 of the 217 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.
“QuickBooks Online – Offers basic revenue recognition features as part of its accounting suite, with plans starting around $15–$30 per month.” Mistral Small · Revenue recognition · budget prompt · first choice
“QuickBooks Online is the safest default choice because it combines built-in AI features with broad small-business accounting coverage” Perplexity Sonar · AI accounting assistants · budget prompt · first choice
“Strongest all-around choice for U.S. SMBs. ... Pick QuickBooks if you want the safest default for a U.S. small business.” GPT-5.4 mini · AI accounting assistants · comparative prompt · first choice
“Market Position: The U.S. small business standard ... Best For: Most U.S. small businesses that want the "safe default"” Kimi K2 · Accounting software · comparative 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.
“Doesn't automate performance obligations, variable pricing, or deferred revenue properly under ASC 606” Grok 4.1 Fast · Revenue recognition · negative prompt · hard negative
“The "Hard No": Basic Accounting Software ... Examples: QuickBooks Online, Xero, Wave.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Revenue recognition · negative prompt · hard negative
“"Basic Accounting Tools Without Native RevRec (QuickBooks, Xero) – Avoid for Complex Needs"” Muse Glimmer 30B · Revenue recognition · negative prompt · hard negative
“you've likely outgrown built-in tools (70–80% match rates at best)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Account reconciliation · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as QuickBooks Online, over the 667 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and QuickBooks Online was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as QuickBooks Online, over the 667 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and QuickBooks Online 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 QuickBooks Online. 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 621 of the 667 answers that named QuickBooks Online and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
ramp.com183
forbes.com151
quickbooks.intuit.com150
g2.com126
xero.com121
wise.com109
numeric.io92
sourceforge.net87
techrepublic.com86
guideflow.com85
1,190 of the 1,190 domain citations in answers naming QuickBooks Online came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
quickbooks.ninja is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, QuickBooks Online takes 8% of first choices and Maxio takes 20%.ShowHide
Search and answers
quickbooks.ninja is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, QuickBooks Online takes 8% of first choices and Maxio takes 20%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “revenue recognition tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “revenue recognition software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,000,000 a month (“quickbooks online”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 11,417 a month
- Its company's site
- quickbooks.ninja shared with QuickBooks's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 253 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 323 · 3 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 170
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
8%
rank 5 of 77 in revenue recognition
Segment leader
20%
Maxio
- First choices
- 139 across its categories
- Named in
- 667 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 621 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 QuickBooks Online
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as QuickBooks Online; a claim can dispute any of them.
QuickBooks 45QuickBooks Online Advanced 15QuickBooks Online (Intuit) 5QuickBooks Online (QBO) 4QuickBooks Online Simple Start 3QuickBooks Free 2QuickBooks Online (Simple Start) 2QuickBooks Online / Intuit 2QuickBooks Online Plus 2QuickBooks Solopreneur 2Intuit QuickBooks 1Intuit QuickBooks Enterprise 1QuickBooks (Intuit Assist) 1QuickBooks (Intuit) 1QuickBooks + a lighter consolidation add-on/process 1QuickBooks / Xero Add-ons 1QuickBooks AI 1QuickBooks Advanced 1QuickBooks Online (Advanced plan) 1QuickBooks Online (Basic Versions) 1QuickBooks Online (Free Version) 1QuickBooks Online (Intuit Assist) 1QuickBooks Online (with Intuit Assist) 1QuickBooks Online (with add-ons) 1
Follow QuickBooks Online
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
QuickBooks is the company behind QuickBooks Online.ShowHide
The company
QuickBooks is the company behind QuickBooks Online.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Why a country or home-currency change forces a brand-new QuickBooks Online company, what it takes to move your lists and history into it, how the two accountant invitations work, and the one irreversible step to get right.
- For
- Businesses moving between two QuickBooks Online companies
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What QuickBooks Online's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: quickbooks.ninja/guides/quickbooks-online-company-migration, quickbooks.ninja/guides/backup-quickbooks-online-to-sql-server, quickbooks.ninja/guides/quickbooks-online-to-desktop-conversion, quickbooks.ninja/guides/quickbooks-downgrade-what-transfers-what-resets. 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 QuickBooks Online'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 QuickBooks Online, 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 QuickBooks Online by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where QuickBooks Online 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 QuickBooks Online, 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.