Every category where a model named Conga CLM 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
Contract lifecycle management and e-signature	Revenue operations	0%	20 of 65	36%	28	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Conga CLM yet. The next is due October 1, 2026. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	0	1	2
GPT-5.4 mini	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	2	2
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	1	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	1	1	3
Mistral Small	0	2	1	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	3	0	1	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	0	2
Kimi K2	1	1	1	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	0	2

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

Direct18 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labelsNone

Comparative19 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative24 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative73 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.

“Salesforce-native integration... Best for: Companies heavily invested in Salesforce ecosystem” GLM 4.7 FlashX · CLM · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Solutions are Salesforce-centralized → Conga or Agentforce Revenue Management” DeepSeek V4 Flash · CLM · direct prompt · alternative

“Best for revenue operations / commercial contracting: Conga.” GPT-5.4 mini · CLM · comparative prompt · alternative

“a CLM platform with a strong focus on Salesforce integration” Claude Haiku 4.5 · CLM · 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.

“Customer reviews show high levels of dissatisfaction with feature usability, interface design, and overall scalability.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · CLM · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid DocuSign CLM and Conga CLM due to their consistent pattern of user complaints” Mistral Small · CLM · negative prompt · hard negative

“Conga (especially for non-Salesforce users) has notable red flags” DeepSeek V4 Flash · CLM · negative prompt · hard negative

“investing in a complex enterprise system (like Ironclad or Conga) that requires thousands of dollars in implementation fees and months of configuration” Gemini 3.5 Flash · CLM · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Conga CLM, over the 73 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Conga CLM was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Ironclad67 of 7312Not in the top three

DocuSign CLM59 of 733Not in the top three

Icertis57 of 7310Not in the top three

Agiloft49 of 732Not in the top three

Sirion44 of 738Not in the top three

LinkSquares32 of 733Not in the top three

Juro27 of 737Not in the top three

PandaDoc18 of 731Not in the top three

Malbek15 of 731Not in the top three

Workday CLM13 of 730Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 Conga CLM. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 14 of the 73 answers that named Conga CLM and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ironcladapp.com8

g2.com7

bindlegal.com6

gartner.com6

getaccept.com6

learn.g2.com6

conga.comYour site5

sirion.ai5

techfundingnews.com5

haqq.ai4

Fifty-three of the fifty-eight domain citations in answers naming Conga CLM came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

getaccept.com/blog/best-contract-management-software6

ironcladapp.com/journal/contract-management/best-contract-management-tools6

learn.g2.com/best-clm-software6

bindlegal.com/resources/best-software/best-clm-tools5

gartner.com/reviews/market/contract-life-cycle-management5

techfundingnews.com/9-best-contract-lifecycle-management-platforms-for-procurement-teams-25

bindlegal.com/resources/best-software/best-enterprise-clm4

conga.com/resources/blog/contract-management-tools4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Conga CLM

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Conga CLM; a claim can dispute any of them.

Conga 10Conga / Agentforce 1Conga CLM (via Salesforce) 1

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 Conga CLM'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 Conga CLM, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at conga.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.