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 35 → 20 of 63
1 category · Named, not rankedUnit4
5Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
4 / 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
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Unit4 was named 2 times in ERP systems, where Oracle NetSuite led with 39%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market23 of 73
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise21 of 47
0%1 label
under the label threshold
In erp systems · 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 Unit4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ERP systems | Accounting and close | 0% | 23 of 73 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Oracle NetSuite at 39% | =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, Unit4 held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · ERP systems · by segment
EnterprisenewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 17 of 41, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ERP systems | 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 35 → 23 of 73 |
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 Unit4 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 Unit4 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained2 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 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.
“Particularly good for service-centric mid-market organizations” MiniMax M2.5 · ERP systems · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“Best for Service/Project-Based B2B: Unit4” GLM 4.7 FlashX · ERP systems · 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Unit4, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Unit4 was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Unit4, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Unit4 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 Unit4. 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 4 of the 5 answers that named Unit4 and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
bigtime.net2
elevatiq.com2
erp.intuit.com2
erpimplementation.eu2
erpresearch.com2
kantata.com2
operating.app2
randgroup.com2
rocketlane.com2
teamwork.com2
Twenty of the twenty domain citations in answers naming Unit4 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 unit4.com
5,463
subdomains included
Content
1,764
counted in the table below
Documentation
1
Product · Integration
105 · 1
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 1,488 | undated | ERP systems, Strategic sourcing | ||
| News or press | 181 | undated | ERP systems | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 31 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 22 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 20 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 12 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 6 | undated | |||
| Conference or event | 3 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated |
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page unit4.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 Unit4
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
Unit4 is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Unit4 is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Enterprise software solutions provider specializing in ERP, FP&A, HCM, and financial management for people-centric organizations
- For
- Finance, HR, Procurement and IT leaders
- Free plan or trial
- Try our AI capabilities free for a limited time. unit4.com
- Customers named
- SQLINRSNuclear Restoration Services (NRS)IO InteractiveNHS East of England Ambulance ServiceSouthampton City CouncilSödertälje KommunUniversity of Salford
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Unit4's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: unit4.com, unit4.com/products/test-lisa, unit4.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 Unit4'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 Unit4, 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 Unit4 by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Unit4 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 Unit4, 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.