Small businessgoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsNot ranked
Workday · 1 category · Named, not rankedWorkday P2P/T&E
12Judge labels
0First choices
4Negative 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
3 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Workday P2P/T&E was named 3 times 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 businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market84 of 87
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise10 of 52
0%8 labels
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 Workday P2P/T&E 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% | 84 of 87 | 67% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Procurify at 42% | =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, Workday P2P/T&E held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Procure-to-pay · 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 78 → 77 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 37 → 10 of 47
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Procure-to-pay | 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 78 → 84 of 87 |
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 Workday P2P/T&E 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 Workday P2P/T&E 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 | 1 | 1 |
| 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 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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
Paraphrase4 labelsNone
Comparative4 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative12 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.
“Platforms Frequently Criticized | Workday P2P & T&E | • Poor user experience and cumbersome interface” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Procure-to-pay · negative prompt · hard negative
“only mentioned in a Reddit thread, which says to avoid it” Perplexity Sonar · Procure-to-pay · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Workday P2P/T&E, over the 12 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Workday P2P/T&E was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Workday P2P/T&E, over the 12 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Workday P2P/T&E 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 Workday P2P/T&E. 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 12 of the 12 answers that named Workday P2P/T&E and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
gitnux.org9
g2.com6
ramp.com6
rippling.com6
zendikt.com6
monday.com5
capterra.com4
guideflow.com4
learn.g2.com4
mindsprint.com4
Fifty-four of the fifty-four domain citations in answers naming Workday P2P/T&E came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Workday P2P/T&E stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Workday P2P/T&E stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- not counted (“workday p2p/t&e”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 0 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on Workday's site (workday.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 84 of 87 in procure-to-pay
Segment leader
42%
Procurify
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 12 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 12 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 Workday P2P/T&E
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Workday P2P/T&E; a claim can dispute any of them.
Workday P2P & T&E 1Workday P2P / T&E 1Workday Procurement / Strategic Sourcing 1
Follow Workday P2P/T&E
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
Workday is the company behind Workday P2P/T&E.ShowHide
The company
Workday is the company behind Workday P2P/T&E.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from Workday
- Workday Accounting Agent, Workday Adaptive, Workday Adaptive Planning, Workday Financial Management, Workday Financials, Workday P2P, Workday PSA, Workday Performance and 8 more
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- IGS Energy streamlined the expense management process with Workday.
- For
- les équipes Achats
- Certifications
- ISO 420012700127701
- Customers named
- IGS EnergyAmazonBroward CollegeVeolia
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, hosting
What Workday P2P/T&E's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: workday.com/en-us/pages/ig-igs-energy-customer-expense-management.html, workday.com/fr-fr/topics/erp/procurement.html, workday.com/en-au/products/procurement/overview.html, workday.com/ja-jp/topics/erp/what-is-procurement.html, workday.com/fr-fr/topics/finance/expense-management.html. 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 Workday P2P/T&E'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 Workday P2P/T&E, 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 Workday P2P/T&E by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Workday P2P/T&E 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 Workday P2P/T&E, 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.