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 50 → 45 of 61
1 category · Named, not rankedTeam Procure
9Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
7 / 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
1 label, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Team Procure was named 1 time in Procure-to-pay, where Procurify led with 42%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business50 of 69
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Mid-market65 of 87
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Enterprise37 of 52
0%1 label
under the label threshold
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 Team Procure 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% | 65 of 87 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Procurify at 42% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Team Procure held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Procure-to-pay · by segment
Mid-marketnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 59 of 79, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Procure-to-pay | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 65 of 87, 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 Team Procure 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 Team Procure 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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
Direct5 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained2 labelsNone
Scale-constrained2 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 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.
No positive label carried a quote.
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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Team Procure, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Team Procure was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Team Procure, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Team Procure 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 Team Procure. 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 9 answers that named Team Procure and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com6
guideflow.com5
softwareconnect.com5
spendflo.com5
payhawk.com4
precoro.com4
softwareadvice.com4
softwaresuggest.com4
f6s.com3
learn.g2.com3
Forty-three of the forty-three domain citations in answers naming Team Procure came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on teamprocure.com
193
subdomains included
Content
38
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
14 · 2
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 35 | 0 | 2025-10-29 | Strategic sourcing, Procure-to-pay | |
| Comparison | 2 | 0 | 2025-04-03 | ||
| Report or ebook | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2025-10-29Esourcing blog
- 2025-10-16Supplier onboarding blog
- 2025-10-06Supplier performance management guide blog
- 2025-06-13Digital procurement transformation blog
- 2025-05-28Kraljic matrix explained blog
- 2025-05-19Group purchasing organizations blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page teamprocure.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. Read September 29, 2026.
Follow Team Procure
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
Team Procure is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Team Procure is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- A cloud-based procurement suite that helps businesses manage purchase requests, purchase orders, approvals, RFQs, and suppliers.
- For
- Businesses; growing teams; organizations manage procurement at any scale
- Price stated
- Procurement Suite $250/mth; Supplier Portal $500/mth; RFQ $500/mth; SourceBid Request a Quote teamprocure.com/pricing
- Starting price
- 250 teamprocure.com/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Try Risk-Free teamprocure.com
- Integrations claimed
- 100 teamprocure.com/solutions/rfq
- Not stated on the pages read
- Certifications, hosting, customers
What Team Procure's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: teamprocure.com, teamprocure.com/pricing, teamprocure.com/solutions/rfq, teamprocure.com/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 Team Procure'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 Team Procure, 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 Team Procure by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Team Procure 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 Team Procure, 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.