Index › Products › Manhattan Associates · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Manhattan Associates

9Judge labels

0First choices

5Negative labels

4 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Manhattan Associates was named 5 times in Order management, where Zoho Inventory led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business95 of 113

under the label threshold

Mid-market128 of 131

under the label threshold

Enterprise34 of 103

under the label threshold

In order 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 Manhattan Associates 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
Order management systems	Revenue operations	0%	128 of 131	60%	5	under 10 labels · led by Zoho Inventory at 25%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Manhattan Associates 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 Manhattan Associates across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	1
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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative3 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 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.

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.

“avoid the massive multimillion-dollar, multi-year implementations associated with legacy enterprise systems (like IBM Sterling or full-scale Manhattan Associates)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Order management · scale prompt · hard negative

“cannot justify the multi-million dollar, multi-year implementation cycles of enterprise heavyweights like Manhattan Associates or IBM Sterling” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Order management · direct prompt · soft negative

“Legacy/Monolithic Systems (IBM Sterling, Older Manhattan Associates) ... May lack cloud-native capabilities” Kimi K2 · Order management · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Manhattan Associates, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Manhattan Associates was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

IBM Sterling5 of 90Not among the top eight

Brightpearl4 of 90Not among the top eight

Kibo Order Management3 of 93Not among the top eight

Fluent Order Management3 of 91Not among the top eight

Cin73 of 90Not among the top eight

Deposco3 of 90Not among the top eight

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Sales3 of 90Not among the top eight

NetSuite Order Management3 of 90Not among the top eight

SAP S/4HANA3 of 90Not among the top eight

Salesforce Commerce Cloud2 of 90Not 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 Manhattan Associates. 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 9 of the 9 answers that named Manhattan Associates and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

manh.com5

monday.com5

kibocommerce.com4

deposco.com3

flow.space3

ignitiv.com3

learn.g2.com3

msdynamicsworld.com3

abilitycommerce.com2

clickpost.ai2

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

Pages cited

manh.com/our-insights/resources/articles/best-order-management-software-oms-compared5

kibocommerce.com/blog/best-order-management-systems4

flow.space/blog/best-order-management-software3

learn.g2.com/best-order-management-software3

monday.com/blog/project-management/order-management-system3

msdynamicsworld.com/blog-post/10-best-order-management-systems-updated3

abilitycommerce.com/best-order-management-systems-for-mid-sized-retailers2

clickpost.ai/blog/order-management-software2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Manhattan Associates

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

where Manhattan Associates 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 Manhattan Associates, 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.