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 53 → 75 of 94
2 categories · Named, not rankedWolters Kluwer
28Judge labels
0First choices
12Negative labels
11 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
8 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Wolters Kluwer was named 8 times in Entity management and 1 other category, where Athennian led with 41%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business78 of 99
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Mid-market59 of 81
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise74 of 89
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
In entity management · 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 Wolters Kluwer 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entity management | Equity and corporate | 0% | 59 of 81 | 25% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Athennian at 41% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Transfer pricing | Tax and compliance | 0% | 83 of 101 | 50% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by TPGenie at 30% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Wolters Kluwer held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Entity management · by segment
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 61 → 56 of 79
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 28 → 63 of 77
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entity management | 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 61 → 59 of 81 |
| Transfer pricing | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 83 of 101, 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 Wolters Kluwer 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 Wolters Kluwer 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 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
Direct3 labelsNone
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative6 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained6 labelsNone
Negative9 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative28 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.
“Considerations: Less specialized for pure transfer pricing vs. ONESOURCE” Kimi K2 · Transfer pricing · comparative prompt · alternative
“Comprehensive TP documentation, analytics; strong in global compliance.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Transfer pricing · 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.
“typically stronger for compliance, registered agent, and corporate filings than for a deeply collaborative “single source of truth” entity platform” GPT-5.4 mini · Entity management · comparative prompt · soft negative
“Legacy "Patchwork" Solutions (Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE, Wolters Kluwer, LexisNexis) ... High costs without proportional innovation” Kimi K2 · Transfer pricing · negative prompt · soft negative
“Be highly cautious with legacy enterprise suites (ONESOURCE, Wolters Kluwer, LexisNexis) if you're a mid-size or smaller company” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Transfer pricing · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Wolters Kluwer, over the 28 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Wolters Kluwer was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Wolters Kluwer, over the 28 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Wolters Kluwer 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 Wolters Kluwer. 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 25 of the 28 answers that named Wolters Kluwer and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com12
wolterskluwer.comYour site11
getsphere.com10
gitnux.org10
itechguides.com9
zipdo.co9
activantcapital.com8
sourceforge.net8
worldmetrics.org8
finance.toolsinfo.com7
Eighty-one of the ninety-two domain citations in answers naming Wolters Kluwer came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
wolterskluwer.com ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Wolters Kluwer takes 0% of first choices and Athennian takes 41%.ShowHide
Search and answers
wolterskluwer.com ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Wolters Kluwer takes 0% of first choices and Athennian takes 41%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “entity management tools”
6
Position for “legal entity management software”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 33,100 a month (“wolters kluwer”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 1,329 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 2,373,906 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 117,664 · 13,778 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 46,626
- Paid Google search
- 19 searches its ads show for, about 1,183 clicks and $15,481 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 59 of 81 in entity management
Segment leader
41%
Athennian
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 28 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 25 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.
Names read as Wolters Kluwer
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Wolters Kluwer; a claim can dispute any of them.
Wolters Kluwer (CCH Axcess) 1Wolters Kluwer (CORs) 1Wolters Kluwer / CCH 1Wolters Kluwer / CT Corporation tools 1
Follow Wolters Kluwer
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
Wolters Kluwer is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Wolters Kluwer is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Wolters Kluwer is a global provider of professional information, software solutions, software, AI solutions, and services.
- For
- professionals in healthcare; tax and accounting; financial and corporate compliance; legal and regulatory; corporate performance and ESG
- Customers named
- artienceICL GroupMetroselskabetScout Motors
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Wolters Kluwer's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: wolterskluwer.com. 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 Wolters Kluwer'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 Wolters Kluwer, 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 Wolters Kluwer by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Wolters Kluwer 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 Wolters Kluwer, 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.