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 8 of 38, unchanged
Sage · 19 categories · RankedSage Intacct
462Judge labels
102First choices
64Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
19Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
44% in Accounting software for mid-market buyers
Rank 1 of 55 in the mid-market standingendorsed leader
9 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 5% of its 44 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Sage Intacct →By buyer segmentA mid-market product: leader at mid-market, not named at small business.
Small business12 of 39
0%14 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market1 of 55
44%44 labels
endorsed leader
Enterprise7 of 63
2%40 labels
accepted challenger
In accounting software · 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 Sage Intacct 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accounting software | Accounting and close | 44% | 1 of 55 | 5% | 44 | endorsed leader | ▲+4Since September 2026: 40% → 44%, +4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial reporting and dashboards | Planning and analysis | 33% | 1 of 105 | 0% | 21 | endorsed leader | ▲+9Since September 2026: 27% → 36%, +9 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AI accounting assistants | Accounting and close | 22% | 1 of 85 | 0% | 24 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 25% → 23%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial consolidation | Accounting and close | 16% | 2 of 102 | 21% | 19 | accepted challenger | ▼−4Since September 2026: 19% → 15%, −4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Fixed asset accounting | Accounting and close | 11% | 3 of 107 | 0% | 15 | accepted challenger | ▲+1Since September 2026: 11% → 12%, +1 point. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| ERP systems | Accounting and close | 10% | 4 of 73 | 3% | 30 | accepted challenger | ▲+1Since September 2026: 11% → 11%, +1 point. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Account reconciliation | Accounting and close | 4% | 8 of 82 | 6% | 18 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Business bill pay | Treasury and cash | 2% | 8 of 98 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by BILL at 32% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Lease accounting | Accounting and close | 0% | 22 of 71 | 12% | 8 | 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. |
| Accounts payable automation | Spend and procurement | 0% | 17 of 54 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 22% | =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% | 78 of 79 | 57% | 7 | 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. |
| Invoicing software | Receivables and billing | 0% | 18 of 71 | 0% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by Zoho Invoice at 24% | ▼−5Since September 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Financial close management | Accounting and close | 0% | 62 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. |
| Cash application | Receivables and billing | 0% | 65 of 83 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Versapay at 9% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Cash flow forecasting | Treasury and cash | 0% | 77 of 101 | 0% | 1 | 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. |
| Crypto accounting | Accounting and close | 0% | 37 of 54 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Bitwave at 27% | |
| Internal controls and SOX | Tax and compliance | 0% | 58 of 90 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 25% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Rebate management | Receivables and billing | 0% | 43 of 80 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Enable at 52% | |
| Spend management platforms | Spend and procurement | 0% | 42 of 46 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 44% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Sage Intacct held within the floor in all nineteen categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Accounting software · by segment
Mid-market▲+4Since September 2026: 40% → 44%, +4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
44%from 40% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 1 of 50, unchanged
Enterprise▼−6Since September 2026: 8% → 2%, −6 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 8% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 4 → 7 of 58
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial reporting | 27% | 36% | ▲+9Since September 2026: 27% → 36%, +9 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 of 105, unchanged |
| Invoicing software | 5% | 0% | ▼−5Since September 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 7 → 18 of 71 |
| Accounting software | 40% | 44% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 40% → 44%, +4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 of 55, unchanged |
| Financial consolidation | 19% | 15% | ▼−4Since September 2026: 19% → 15%, −4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 → 2 of 102 |
| Account reconciliation | 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 10 → 8 of 82 |
| Business bill pay | 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 46 → 8 of 98 |
| AI accounting assistants | 25% | 23% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 25% → 23%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 of 85, unchanged |
| Fixed asset accounting | 11% | 12% | ▲+1Since September 2026: 11% → 12%, +1 point. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 2 → 3 of 107 |
| ERP systems | 11% | 11% | ▲+1Since September 2026: 11% → 11%, +1 point. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 of 73, unchanged |
| 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 24 → 22 of 71 |
| Accounts payable automat | 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 → 17 of 54 |
| 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 77 → 78 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 54 → 62 of 85 |
| Cash application | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 65 of 83, 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 39 → 77 of 101 |
| Crypto accounting | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 37 of 54, unchanged |
| Internal controls | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 58 of 90, unchanged |
| Rebate management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 43 of 80, unchanged |
| Spend management platfor | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 42 of 46, 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 Sage Intacct 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 Sage Intacct 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 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 13 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 6 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 11 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 10 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 18 |
| Mistral Small | 7 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 17 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 7 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 21 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 11 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 5 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 15 |
| Kimi K2 | 10 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 23 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 5 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 17 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 5 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 16 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 4 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 14 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 3 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 15 |
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
Direct137 labels47
Paraphrase101 labels43
Comparative73 labels5not counted in share
Budget-constrained37 labels4
Scale-constrained60 labels8
Negative54 labels3not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative462 labels in all, every segment counted; 102 of the 110 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.
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Sage Intacct offers the best balance of robust accounting capabilities, reasonable implementation costs, and scalability.” Kimi K2 · Accounting software · direct prompt · first choice
“Start with Sage Intacct if you're mid-market B2B prioritizing accounting depth and cost-effectiveness—it's the most cited "best for mid-market."” Grok 4.1 Fast · Fixed asset accounting · direct prompt · first choice
“Sage Intacct is widely regarded as the premier "best-of-breed" financial system for mid-market services and subscription-based B2B companies.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Financial reporting · direct prompt · first choice
“If financial management is your top priority, Sage Intacct is often the best fit due to its specialized focus on accounting and finance.” Mistral Small · ERP systems · 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.
“Starts around $12,000/year (single user) with implementation costs of $5K $50K” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Financial consolidation · budget prompt · hard negative
“avoid big-suite tools like Planful or Sage Intacct” GPT-5.4 mini · Financial consolidation · budget prompt · hard negative
“ERP-native or basic modules (e.g., some Sage Intacct, QuickBooks add-ons): Often marketed as full automation but limited to reminders and reports.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Accounts receivable auto · negative prompt · soft negative
“mentions Sage Intacct as a potential AR automation platform, but notes that there are modern tools available that are completely bank-agnostic” Llama 4 Maverick · Accounts receivable auto · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Sage Intacct, over the 462 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sage Intacct was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Sage Intacct, over the 462 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sage Intacct 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 Sage Intacct. 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 433 of the 462 answers that named Sage Intacct and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
ramp.com142
erpresearch.com128
g2.com108
randgroup.com73
forbes.com72
gitnux.org71
learn.g2.com71
worldmetrics.org67
guideflow.com65
netsuite.com63
860 of the 860 domain citations in answers naming Sage Intacct came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Sage Intacct stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Sage Intacct stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “accounting software”
1
Position for “accounting platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 22,200 a month (“sage intacct”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 373 a month
- Its company's site
- sage.com shared with Sage's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 1,737,127 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 73,487 · 4,719 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 36,428
- Paid Google search
- 125 searches its ads show for, about 2,544 clicks and $114,671 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
44%
rank 1 of 55 in accounting software
First choices
102
across its categories
- Named in
- 462 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 433 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 Sage Intacct
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Sage Intacct; a claim can dispute any of them.
Sage Intacct Fixed Assets 3Sage 2Sage 50/Intacct 1Sage Intacct / Sage 100 1Sage Intacct / Sage Accounting + Sage Copilot 1Sage Intacct AP Automation 1Sage Intacct Lease Accounting 1Sage Intacct/X3 1
Follow Sage Intacct
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
Sage is the company behind Sage Intacct.ShowHide
The company
Sage is the company behind Sage Intacct.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from Sage
- Sage 50, Sage 50cloud, Sage AR Automation, Sage Accounting, Sage Business Accounting, Sage Business Cloud Accounting, Sage Copilot, Sage Expense Management and 5 more
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Extend the value of your Sage Intacct subscription
- For
- people-centric companies
- Price stated
- transparent pricing hcm.sage.com/partners/sage-intacct
- Customers named
- Pepper ConstructionCommunity Services GroupMagnum Technical ServicesAtlas Engineered ProductsBayley Construction
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Sage Intacct's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: hcm.sage.com/sage-intacct-integration, hcm.sage.com/partners/sage-intacct, hcm.sage.com/white-papers/sage-intacct. 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 Sage Intacct'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 Sage Intacct, 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 Sage Intacct by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Sage Intacct 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 Sage Intacct, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Sage Intacct is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Sage Intacct is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideAccounting software
AI models recommend Sage Intacct first in Accounting software this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Financial reporting and dashboards
AI models recommend Sage Intacct first in Financial reporting and dashboards this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
AI accounting assistants
AI models recommend Sage Intacct first in AI accounting assistants this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Financial consolidation
Sage Intacct is among the products AI models recommend first in Financial consolidation this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Fixed asset accounting
Sage Intacct is among the products AI models recommend first in Fixed asset accounting this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.