AI Indexes
Finance AI Index
Index › Products › SAP Audit Management · October 2026 Edition
1 category · Named, not ranked

SAP Audit Management

10Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
6 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
4 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SAP Audit Management was named 4 times in Internal controls, where FloQast led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In internal controls · 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 Audit Management 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
Internal controls and SOXTax and compliance0%56 of 9025%4under 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.

Movement

Since September 2026, SAP Audit Management held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 10 points.

Best category · Internal controls · by segment

Small businessnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 42 of 107, unchanged
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 37 → 56 of 88
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 22 of 58, unchanged

All categories · Mid-market

CategorySeptember 2026NowChangeReadingRank
Internal controls0%0%=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Within noiseRank 37 → 56 of 90

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 Audit Management across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500101
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast00000
Mistral Small01001
DeepSeek V4 Flash00000
Llama 4 Maverick01001
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200011
GLM 4.7 FlashX00000
MiniMax M2.500000
GPT-6 Luna00000
Muse Glimmer 30B00000

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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase4 labelsNone
Comparative4 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative2 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Designed for ERP-heavy enterprises, these tools integrate with SAP environments” Mistral Small · Internal controls · comparative prompt · alternative
“ERP-heavy enterprises may require tools like Pathlock or SAP Audit Management” Llama 4 Maverick · Internal controls · paraphrase 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.

“Enterprise-grade solutions that require significant implementation resources and budget.” Kimi K2 · Internal controls · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SAP Audit Management, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Audit Management was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
AuditBoard8 of 102Not among the top eight
MetricStream7 of 101Not among the top eight
Pathlock7 of 100Not among the top eight
Sprinto7 of 100Not among the top eight
Workiva7 of 100Not among the top eight
Diligent One Platform5 of 101Not among the top eight
Hyperproof4 of 102Not among the top eight
LogicGate Risk Cloud4 of 100Not among the top eight
Archer3 of 100Not among the top eight
ServiceNow Integrated Risk Management3 of 100Not among the top eight
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 Audit Management. 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 9 of the 10 answers that named SAP Audit Management and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

sprinto.com9
gitnux.org6
supervizor.com6
wolterskluwer.com5
metricstream.com4
v-comply.com4
wifitalents.com4
riskwatch.com3
worldmetrics.org3
zipdo.co3

Forty-seven of the forty-seven domain citations in answers naming SAP Audit Management 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 Audit Management takes 0% of first choices and FloQast takes 25%.
ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates
Position for “internal controls tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “sox compliance software”
–
not in the top ten
Searches for its name, Google
90 a month (“sap audit management”)
AI search demand for its name, est.
4 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)
Ads on GoogleDetailLess
23+ ads · 21 text, 1 image, 1 video · 23 shown in the last 30 days

First shown July 2023, as SAP, verified. Ads started 2025-10 to 2026-09: 9 in the year, 14 before. 97 more by other advertisers linking to it.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition
Share of first choices
0%
rank 56 of 90 in internal controls
Segment leader
25%
FloQast
First choices
0 across its categories
Named in
10 answers
Its own site cited
in 9 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
Addresses on sap.com
20,663
subdomains included
Content
2,976
counted in the table below
Documentation
1,426
Product · Integration
1,660 · 3,500
KindPagesLast 90 days2025-10 to 2026-09LatestCategories named
News or press1,797922026-09-28
Blog677undated
Glossary or explainer18302023-08-01
Conference or event14602026-05-01
Report or ebook9802025-04-01
Case study2902023-10-01
Comparison21undated
Template or tool13undated
Webinar or virtual event10undated
Podcast or video212026-09-24

Events in person

Upcoming

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.

Follow SAP Audit Management

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 Audit Management'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 Audit Management, 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 Audit Management by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

  • where SAP Audit Management 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 Audit Management, 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.
The subscriber app

A verification link goes to your work email; an address at sap.com is approved on the spot, any other is reviewed by hand. Your email is never published. Claiming gives no say over labels, shares, verdicts or which quotes appear.