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 105 → 103 of 103
4 categories · RankedTableau
157Judge labels
3First choices
73Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
4Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in Financial reporting for mid-market buyers
Rank 7 of 105 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 24% of its 29 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Tableau →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business105 of 105
0%17 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market7 of 105
4%29 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise18 of 109
0%34 labels
accepted challenger
In financial reporting · 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 Tableau 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial reporting and dashboards | Planning and analysis | 4% | 7 of 105 | 24% | 29 | accepted challenger | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| SaaS metrics and analytics | Planning and analysis | 0% | 78 of 78 | 62% | 16 | criticized challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Board and investor reporting | Planning and analysis | 0% | 86 of 99 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by OnBoard at 26% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| ESG and carbon reporting | Equity and corporate | 0% | 94 of 110 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Greenly at 36% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Tableau held within the floor in all four categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Financial reporting · by segment
Mid-market▲+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 19 → 6 of 102
Enterprise▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 10 → 16 of 101
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial reporting | 0% | 4% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 19 → 7 of 105 |
| SaaS metrics | 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 7 → 78 of 78 |
| Board | 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 83 → 86 of 99 |
| ESG and carbon reporting | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 94 of 110, 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 Tableau 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 Tableau 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 7 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
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
Direct16 labelsNone
Paraphrase20 labels3
Comparative43 labels3not counted in share
Budget-constrained7 labelsNone
Scale-constrained9 labelsNone
Negative62 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative157 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 6 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.
“Power BI or Tableau would be the most versatile choices... while Tableau offers more advanced visualization capabilities” MiniMax M2.5 · Financial reporting · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Choose Tableau if visualization quality is critical, you have the budget, and do exploratory analysis” Kimi K2 · Financial reporting · comparative prompt · first choice
“reviews note Power BI/Tableau as most adopted for versatility” Grok 4.1 Fast · Financial reporting · comparative prompt · first choice
“Power BI or Tableau tend to be the sweet spot” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Financial reporting · 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.
“Avoid assuming standard BI tools can handle SaaS metrics natively without significant engineering effort.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · SaaS metrics · negative prompt · hard negative
“What to avoid: Live, raw business intelligence (BI) tools like Power BI, Tableau” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Board · negative prompt · hard negative
“too heavy and expensive for early-stage SaaS companies and can become unwieldy” Mistral Small · SaaS metrics · negative prompt · hard negative
“Tableau received 100% negative sentiment for SaaS metrics use cases” GLM 4.7 FlashX · SaaS metrics · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Tableau, over the 157 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Tableau was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Tableau, over the 157 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Tableau 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 Tableau. 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 138 of the 157 answers that named Tableau and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
baremetrics.com38
databox.com32
g2.com29
worldmetrics.org29
finance-ai-index.com27
designrevision.com23
linkedin.com22
domo.com21
improvado.io21
kanerika.com20
262 of the 262 domain citations in answers naming Tableau came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
tableau.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Tableau takes 4% of first choices and Sage Intacct takes 33%.ShowHide
Search and answers
tableau.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Tableau takes 4% of first choices and Sage Intacct takes 33%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “reporting tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “financial reporting software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 135,000 a month (“tableau”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 15,635 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 1,201,809 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 65,203 · 8,624 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 121,689
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 1 clicks and $23 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
4%
rank 7 of 105 in financial reporting
Segment leader
33%
Sage Intacct
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 157 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 138 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 tableau.com
10,000
subdomains included
Content
6,752
counted in the table below
Documentation
61
Product · Integration
656 · 4
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conference or event | 5,010 | undated | |||
| Blog | 1,045 | undated | |||
| Case study | 598 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 36 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 29 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 24 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 4 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 4 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 2 | undated |
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page tableau.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 Tableau
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Tableau; a claim can dispute any of them.
Tableau (Salesforce) 2Tableau (by Salesforce) 2
Follow Tableau
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
Tableau is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Tableau is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Business Intelligence and Analytics Software
- For
- Teams
- Free plan or trial
- Start for free tableau.com
- Integrations claimed
- 250 tableau.com/events/conference/2021/partners
- Certifications
- 2026 Gartner® Magic Quadrant™ Leader
- Customers named
- Feeding AmericaRakutenInformaticaCollibraPiedmont HealthcareT-MobileEquinixAutodesk
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, hosting
What Tableau's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: tableau.com, trust.tableau.com, tableau.com/products/online/specs, tableau.com/events/conference/2021/partners. 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 Tableau'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 Tableau, 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 Tableau by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Tableau 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 Tableau, 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.