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 75 → 61 of 61
7 categories · RankedSAP Ariba
546Judge labels
61First choices
228Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
7Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
36% in Strategic sourcing for enterprise buyers
Rank 87 of 87 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 57% of its 46 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of SAP Ariba →By buyer segmentAn enterprise product: leader at enterprise, not named at small business or mid-market.
Small business69 of 69
0%29 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market87 of 87
0%46 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise2 of 52
30%72 labels
endorsed leader
In procure-to-pay · 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 SAP Ariba 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Procure-to-pay | Spend and procurement | 0% | 87 of 87 | 57% | 46 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Supplier management | Spend and procurement | 0% | 111 of 111 | 57% | 42 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Strategic sourcing | Spend and procurement | 0% | 128 of 128 | 69% | 32 | 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% | 26 of 136 | 20% | 10 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Spend management platforms | Spend and procurement | 0% | 14 of 46 | 14% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 44% | =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% | 49 of 54 | 50% | 2 | 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. |
| Expense management | Spend and procurement | 0% | 49 of 54 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Ramp at 35% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, SAP Ariba held within the floor in all seven categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Procure-to-pay · 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 81 → 79 of 79
Enterprise▼−5Since September 2026: 36% → 31%, −5 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
31%from 36% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 2 of 47, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Global e-invoicing compl | 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 9 → 26 of 136 |
| Procure-to-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 81 → 87 of 87 |
| Supplier management | 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 79 → 111 of 111 |
| Strategic sourcing | 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 → 128 of 128 |
| Spend management platfor | 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 → 14 of 46 |
| 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 54 → 49 of 54 |
| Expense management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 49 of 54, 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 SAP Ariba 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 SAP Ariba 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 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 10 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 17 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 6 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 1 | 3 | 9 | 14 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 8 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 4 | 1 | 7 | 12 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 3 | 1 | 11 | 15 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 13 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 9 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 11 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 5 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 2 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 11 |
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
Direct97 labels29
Paraphrase79 labels24
Comparative126 labels28not counted in share
Budget-constrained72 labels5
Scale-constrained68 labels3
Negative104 labels5not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative546 labels in all, every segment counted; 61 of the 94 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.
“is recognized as a best enterprise suite, particularly for large procurement teams that need lifecycle, performance, and risk in one governed system tied to SAP” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Supplier management · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best overall in 2026 expert picks: *Large enterprises needing supplier collaboration and guided buying across complex spend.* Rank #1 9.2/10” Muse Glimmer 30B · Procure-to-pay · comparative prompt · first choice
“for procurement, the leading tools are strategic sourcing platforms like SAP Ariba, Coupa, Archlet, Scanmarket, and Market Dojo” Perplexity Sonar · Strategic sourcing · comparative prompt · first choice
“choose a full source-to-pay SRM suite like SAP Ariba, Coupa, Ivalua or Jaggaer if you need end-to-end supplier lifecycle” Muse Glimmer 30B · Supplier management · 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.
“This is the platform with the most significant and consistent negative feedback." ... "Small-to-mid companies, vendors forced to use it, anyone who values user experience” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Supplier management · negative prompt · hard negative
“Mid-sized companies should avoid heavyweight enterprise legacy platforms (like SAP Ariba or Oracle) because they are highly expensive, complex” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Strategic sourcing · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“You generally want to avoid heavy enterprise solutions (like SAP Ariba) unless you have a dedicated procurement team of 10+” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Strategic sourcing · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“avoid platforms that monetize the supplier side of the network.... The Platforms: SAP Ariba, Coupa, and Oracle SCM.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Supplier management · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP Ariba, over the 545 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Ariba was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP Ariba, over the 545 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Ariba 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 SAP Ariba. 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 519 of the 545 answers that named SAP Ariba and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com202
spendflo.com190
mindsprint.com182
guideflow.com131
ramp.com121
learn.g2.com112
precoro.com108
payhawk.com86
softwareadvice.com84
softwareconnect.com84
1,300 of the 1,300 domain citations in answers naming SAP Ariba came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
sap.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, SAP Ariba takes 0% of first choices and Procurify takes 42%.ShowHide
Search and answers
sap.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, SAP Ariba takes 0% of first choices and Procurify takes 42%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “procurement platforms”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “procure-to-pay platform”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 8,100 a month (“sap ariba”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 554 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 2,214,514 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 117,113 · 18,594 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 113,777
- Paid Google search
- 5 searches its ads show for, about 68 clicks and $1,251 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 87 of 87 in procure-to-pay
Segment leader
42%
Procurify
- First choices
- 61 across its categories
- Named in
- 545 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 519 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 sap.com
20,663
subdomains included
Content
2,976
counted in the table below
Documentation
1,426
Product · Integration
1,660 · 3,500
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News or press | 1,797 | 92 | 2026-09-28 | ||
| Blog | 677 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 183 | 0 | 2023-08-01 | ||
| Conference or event | 146 | 0 | 2026-05-01 | ||
| Report or ebook | 98 | 0 | 2025-04-01 | ||
| Case study | 29 | 0 | 2023-10-01 | ||
| Comparison | 21 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 13 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 10 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 2 | 1 | 2026-09-24 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-28Submissions officially open 2027 sap innovation awards news or press
- 2026-09-28Coming soon customer influence feedback experience news or press
- 2026-09-28Sap nvidia openshell auditable ai agents enterprise systems news or press
- 2026-09-28Sap connect 2026 media analyst program news or press
- 2026-09-24Sap apphaus network partner bluestonex builds the bridge news or press
- 2026-09-24Autonomous enterprise podcast lesssons 16 executive conversations podcast or video
Events in person
Upcoming
- April 6, 2027 to April 8, 2027SAP ALM Summit North America 2027SAP America, Inc., Newtown Square, United States · hosts
As the event pages on sap.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page sap.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 SAP Ariba
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SAP Ariba; a claim can dispute any of them.
SAP Ariba Supplier Management 5Ariba 3Ariba Network 1SAP Ariba / SAP Business Network 1SAP Ariba Invoice Management 1SAP Ariba Invoicing / SAP Business Network 1SAP Ariba Sourcing 1SAP Ariba Supplier Management / SAP S/4HANA Cloud 1SAP Ariba/OpenText 1SAP Business Network / SAP Ariba Invoicing 1
Follow SAP Ariba
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.
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 SAP Ariba'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 SAP Ariba, 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 SAP Ariba by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where SAP Ariba 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 SAP Ariba, 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.