GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › Microsoft Purview · September 2026 Edition

Microsoft · 1 category · Named, not ranked

Microsoft Purview

18Judge labels

1First choices

2Negative labels

11 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

6 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Microsoft Purview was named 6 times in DMP, where Segment led with 18%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business139 of 213

under the label threshold

Mid-market38 of 183

under the label threshold

Enterprise14 of 174

under the label threshold

In dmp · 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 Microsoft Purview 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
Data management platforms	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	38 of 183	0%	6	under 10 labels · led by Segment at 18%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	1	0	1
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

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

Paraphrase1 label1

Comparative14 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative18 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 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.

“Governance / catalog / compliance: Collibra or Microsoft Purview.” Perplexity Sonar · DMP · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for: Organizations prioritizing governance and compliance” Mistral Small · DMP · comparative prompt · alternative

“Deep M365 integration, AI classification” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DMP · comparative prompt · alternative

“Good for Microsoft-heavy environments.” GPT-5.4 mini · DMP · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Microsoft Purview, over the 18 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Microsoft Purview was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Collibra14 of 180Not in the top three

Snowflake12 of 185Not in the top three

Databricks11 of 184Not in the top three

BigQuery11 of 181Not in the top three

Alation10 of 180Not in the top three

Fivetran9 of 180Not in the top three

Microsoft Fabric9 of 180Not in the top three

Atlan8 of 180Not in the top three

Matillion7 of 180Not in the top three

Informatica IDMC6 of 181Not 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 Microsoft Purview. 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 4 of the 18 answers that named Microsoft Purview and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

fortegrp.com3

alation.com2

domo.com2

improvado.io2

larksuite.com2

matillion.com2

softwareadvice.com2

blog.hubspot.com1

businesswith.com1

capterra.com1

Eighteen of the eighteen domain citations in answers naming Microsoft Purview came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

fortegrp.com/insights/top-19-data-management-tools-platforms-in-the-usa3

alation.com/blog/data-management-software2

domo.com/learn/article/best-data-management-platforms2

improvado.io/blog/data-governance-tools2

larksuite.com/en_us/blog/data-management-tools2

matillion.com/learn/blog/data-management-platforms2

softwareadvice.com/data-management-platforms2

blog.hubspot.com/service/data-management-platform1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Microsoft Purview

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

Microsoft Purview / Azure Purview 1

The company

Microsoft is the company behind Microsoft Purview.

Website: microsoft.com
Headquarters: Vancouver, Canada
Founded: 1975
Employees: about 228,000 (2024)
Ownership: Public, 4338 on Hong Kong Stock Exchange

From Wikidata, fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · LinkedIn · Crunchbase

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 Microsoft Purview'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 Microsoft Purview, 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 microsoftpurview.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.