Index › Products › Verafin · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Verafin

7Judge 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Verafin was named 2 times in AML monitoring, where ComplyAdvantage led with 33%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business30 of 81

under the label threshold

Mid-market84 of 108

under the label threshold

Enterprise27 of 108

under the label threshold

In aml monitoring · 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 Verafin 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
AML and transaction monitoring	Tax and compliance	0%	84 of 108	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by ComplyAdvantage at 33%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Verafin yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Verafin across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative2 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative7 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

“The Preferred Choice for U.S. Banks and Credit Unions.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · AML monitoring · comparative 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.

“Hybrid/enterprise (NICE Actimize, SAS, Oracle, Verafin) — more robust but heavier, slower, and costlier; typically overkill” DeepSeek V4 Flash · AML monitoring · scale prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Verafin, over the 7 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Verafin was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

ComplyAdvantage7 of 70Not among the top eight

NICE Actimize6 of 71Not among the top eight

Feedzai3 of 70Not among the top eight

Hawk AI3 of 70Not among the top eight

Oracle Financial Crime and Compliance Management3 of 70Not among the top eight

Alessa2 of 71Not among the top eight

Napier AI2 of 70Not among the top eight

SAS Anti-Money Laundering2 of 70Not among the top eight

Sanction Scanner2 of 70Not among the top eight

Sardine2 of 70Not 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 Verafin. 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 7 of the 7 answers that named Verafin and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

bureau.id4

cside.com4

fraudio.com4

worldmetrics.org4

amlwatcher.com3

gartner.com3

ondato.com3

facctum.com2

sphinxhq.com2

tookitaki.com2

No domain is on file for Verafin, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

bureau.id/resources/blog/transaction-monitoring-software4

cside.com/blog/best-transaction-monitoring-software4

fraudio.com/roundups/best-aml-transaction-monitoring-software3

ondato.com/blog/best-aml-software3

worldmetrics.org/best/anti-money-laundering-aml-software3

amlwatcher.com/blog/aml-software-vendors2

facctum.com/blog/best-transaction-monitoring-software-2026-aml-risk-behavioral-monitoring-2

gartner.com/reviews/market/anti-money-laundering2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Verafin

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

where Verafin 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 Verafin, 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.