GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › MicroStrategy · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

MicroStrategy

14Judge labels

0First choices

10Negative labels

9 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

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. MicroStrategy was named 4 times in BI & dashboards, where Microsoft Power BI led with 62%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business43 of 56

under the label threshold

Mid-market71 of 73

under the label threshold

Enterprise60 of 61

under the label threshold

In bi & dashboards · 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 MicroStrategy 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
Dashboards and data visualization	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	71 of 73	100%	4	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Power BI at 62%

Movement

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

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

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative10 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative14 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.

“This is perhaps the most problematic tool to invest in right now, for two major reasons” DeepSeek V4 Flash · BI & dashboards · negative prompt · hard negative

“Why to avoid: Steep learning curve, expensive, complex admin setup” Mistral Small · BI & dashboards · negative prompt · hard negative

“and sometimes MicroStrategy, mainly due to concerns about complexity, cost, or fit for modern needs” Perplexity Sonar · BI & dashboards · negative prompt · soft negative

“Why to approach with caution: Company rebranded around Bitcoin; BI product now cloud-only emphasis” Kimi K2 · BI & dashboards · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as MicroStrategy, over the 14 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and MicroStrategy was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Power BI14 of 147Not in the top three

Tableau14 of 140Not in the top three

Looker12 of 140Not in the top three

Domo11 of 140Not in the top three

Qlik Sense11 of 140Not in the top three

IBM Cognos Analytics8 of 140Not in the top three

ThoughtSpot8 of 140Not in the top three

Sisense7 of 140Not in the top three

Sigma6 of 140Not in the top three

Looker Studio5 of 141Not 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 MicroStrategy. 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 3 of the 14 answers that named MicroStrategy and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

improvado.io3

qlik.com3

reddit.com3

toolradar.com3

cio.com2

getgalaxy.io2

gitnux.org2

holistics.io2

slingshotapp.io2

tellius.com2

Twenty-four of the twenty-four domain citations in answers naming MicroStrategy came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

qlik.com/us/business-intelligence/business-intelligence-tools3

toolradar.com/guides/best-business-intelligence-tools3

getgalaxy.io/articles/best-business-intelligence-analytics-platforms-20262

gitnux.org/best/enterprise-business-intelligence-software2

improvado.io/blog/business-intelligence-trends2

improvado.io/blog/enterprise-business-intelligence-software-solutions2

qlik.com/us/business-intelligence-tools2

slingshotapp.io/blog/top-bi-tools2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as MicroStrategy

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

MicroStrategy (now branded "Strategy") 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 MicroStrategy'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 MicroStrategy, 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 microstrategy.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.