CPQ
Asked as “CPQ software”, and as “configure, price, quote tool”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B software company. 54 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, six models each.
Standing · first-choice share
57%
Consensus
57DealHub15PandaDoc09QuoteWerks19others
57% of first choices, consensus.
Since September 2026▼−4Since September 2026: 62% → 58%, −4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.DealHub held the lead, −4 points on 62%, inside the 12-point floor.
The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all six models, for a mid-market B2B software company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
01
DealHub57%9%57endorsed leader▼−4Since September 2026: 62% → 58%, −4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.62% → 58%
DealHub57%9%57endorsed leader▼−4Since September 2026: 62% → 58%, −4 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.62% → 58%02
PandaDoc15%7%41accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 13% → 16%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.13% → 16%
PandaDoc15%7%41accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 13% → 16%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.13% → 16%03
QuoteWerks9%4%23accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 9% → 9%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.9% → 9%
QuoteWerks9%4%23accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 9% → 9%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.9% → 9%04
Conga CPQ4%23%35accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Conga CPQ4%23%35accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%05
HubSpot Commerce Hub2%4%25accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 2%
HubSpot Commerce Hub2%4%25accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 2%06
Proposify2%8%12accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%
Proposify2%8%12accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%07
Salesforce Revenue Cloud2%44%66criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Salesforce Revenue Cloud2%44%66criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%Show the five products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
11SAP CPQ0%38%26criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
12
Oracle CPQ0%38%32criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Oracle CPQ0%38%32criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%10
PROS Smart CPQ0%10%10accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
PROS Smart CPQ0%10%10accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%09
Tacton0%9%11accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Tacton0%9%11accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%08
Experlogix0%8%24accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Experlogix0%8%24accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%The floor is 12 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. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
All six head-to-head pages: the top four products, each against each
One product takes 57% of first choices here, so the chart would put eleven markers in one corner and one at the far edge. The two measurements it plots are columns in the standing above: share, and the negative label rate. Three products carry a negative rate above 25% in this category.
What they warned about
A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
Salesforce Revenue Cloud44%
29 of 66 labels negative · 11 of 6 models · 6 hard negative
“Salesforce CPQ is now end of sale for new customers... Any CPQ that is being phased out or has a clear successor you'd be forced to migrate to soon.” GPT-5.4 mini, negative prompt
Oracle CPQ38%
12 of 32 labels negative · 9 of 6 models · 4 hard negative
“avoid enterprise-grade CPQs like Salesforce CPQ, Oracle CPQ Cloud, or DealHub initially” Qwen 3.7 Flash, budget prompt
SAP CPQ
38%
10 of 26 labels negative · 9 of 6 models · 2 hard negative
“If you are not already deeply embedded in the SAP ecosystem (S/4HANA, ECC), **avoid**.” DeepSeek V4 Flash, negative prompt
Conga CPQ23%
8 of 35 labels negative · 8 of 6 models
“some Conga products are described as hard to configure and difficult for teams to troubleshoot without vendor support” GPT-5.4 mini, negative prompt
What they cite
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list: fourteen of the six in this edition.
Sites the answers cite
81 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 6 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 991 links across 186 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. None of the 36 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category.
vendor site · Qobra44 answers · 44 citations · 12 models
vendor site · Albato35 answers · 35 citations · 12 models
vendor site · Guideflow33 answers · 34 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Monday.com32 answers · 36 citations · 10 models
28 answers · 70 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Everstage26 answers · 28 citations · 9 models
vendor site · PandaDoc24 answers · 37 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Conga24 answers · 27 citations · 12 models
vendor site · DealHub23 answers · 27 citations · 11 models
23 answers · 24 citations · 10 models
vendor site · BetterCommerce19 answers · 19 citations · 10 models
17 answers · 24 citations · 7 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
43 answers · 12 models
35 answers · 12 models
32 answers · 10 models
25 answers · 9 models
25 answers · 9 models
23 answers · 10 models
18 answers · 10 models
17 answers · 10 models
14 answers · 9 models
14 answers · 6 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best cpq software”, “cpq software”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days | Best Google position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DealHub dealhub.io | 57% | 175 | 1,900 | 83 | 319,299 | $372 | 62 | 1 |
| PandaDoc pandadoc.com | 15% | 527 | 60,500 | 510 | 425,196 | $42,516 | 119 | |
| QuoteWerks quotewerks.com | 9% | 84 | 1,300 | 22 | 3,244 | 27 | 5 | |
| Bitrix24 bitrix24.com | 6% | 37 | 5,400 | 90 | 69,160 | 104 | ||
| Conga CPQ conga.com | 4% | 108 | 320 | 19 | 46,363 | $224 | 120 | |
| HubSpot parent site HubSpot Commerce Hub 2% | 2% | 72 | 368,000 | 9,776 | ||||
| Proposify proposify.com | 2% | 274 | 3,600 | 28 | 38,103 | 27 | ||
| Odoo odoo.com | 2% | 23 | 49,500 | 3,053 | 406,262 | $644 | 95 | |
| Zoho parent site Zoho CRM 2%, Zoho CPQ 0% | 2% | 332 | 49,500 | 660 | ||||
| Salesforce parent site Salesforce Revenue Cloud 2% | 2% | 215 | 550,000 | 60,632 |
Google's top ten for the two searches hold 15 sites; 3 of them are among the sites the models cited here (dealhub.io, g2.com, monday.com). The first result for “best cpq software” is gartner.com.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best CPQ software for a mid-market B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which configure, price, quote tool would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B company?”Comparative“What are the top CPQ tools and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best CPQ software for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a CPQ software. What should we look at?”Negative“Which CPQ tools should I avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Opus 5no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Claude Opus 4.8no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-6 Astrano first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-5.6 Solno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Gemini 3.1 Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Perplexity Sonar Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Bold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency. Full answer text is in the free responses file. Download the record
Zero rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
Cincom read as Cincom CPQ
Conga read as Conga CPQ
HubSpot read as HubSpot Commerce Hub
HubSpot native read as HubSpot Commerce Hub
Oracle read as Oracle CPQ
PROS read as PROS Smart CPQ
PROS CPQ read as PROS Smart CPQ
SAP read as SAP CPQ
Salesforce (Agentforce Revenue Management) read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Salesforce CPQ read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Salesforce CPQ (Now Salesforce Revenue Cloud) read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Salesforce CPQ (Revenue Cloud) read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Salesforce CPQ (SteelBrick) read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Salesforce CPQ (now Revenue Cloud) read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Salesforce CPQ / Revenue Cloud read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Salesforce Revenue Management read as Salesforce Revenue Cloud
Zoho CRM CPQ read as Zoho CPQ
Unresolved, counted raw
"In-House" Custom CPQ Systems
Agentforce Revenue Management, formerly Salesforce Revenue Cloud
BetterCommerce CPQ
Combeenation
Datto Commerce (formerly Gluh)
Dealsign
HubSpot’s built-in CPQ/Revenue Hub
Logik.ai
Microsoft Dynamics 365 CPQ
Multiply CPQ
Price f(x)
PriceFx CPQ
ProPricer
ProsperStack
Salesforce Revenue Cloud CPQ
Vendr
altaFlow
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.