GTM AI Index

Index › Vendors › PROS · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

PROS

14Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

8 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

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. PROS was named 5 times in CPQ, where DealHub led with 62%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business63 of 71

under the label threshold

Mid-market20 of 73

under the label threshold

Enterprise12 of 60

under the label threshold

In cpq · 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 PROS 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
CPQ	Revenue operations	0%	20 of 73	20%	5	under 10 labels · led by DealHub at 62%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for PROS 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 PROS 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	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative6 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.

“Complex manufacturing? PROS, Tacton, or Revalize (higher ratings, fewer complaints)” Grok 4.1 Fast · CPQ · negative prompt · alternative

“Choose PROS or Vendavo if pricing optimization is the main challenge.” GPT-5.4 mini · CPQ · comparative prompt · alternative

“AI-powered price optimization; dynamic pricing intelligence” Kimi K2 · CPQ · 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.

“may be too much for smaller teams and can have high total cost of ownership” Perplexity Sonar · CPQ · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

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

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

SAP CPQ13 of 140Not in the top three

Oracle CPQ12 of 141Not in the top three

Conga CPQ11 of 140Not in the top three

Tacton10 of 141Not in the top three

DealHub9 of 142Not in the top three

Salesforce CPQ9 of 142Not in the top three

Salesforce Revenue Cloud5 of 144Not in the top three

HubSpot Commerce Hub4 of 141Not in the top three

Zuora CPQ4 of 140Not in the top three

Epicor CPQ3 of 140Not 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 PROS. 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 2 of the 14 answers that named PROS and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

bettercommerce.io1

cincom.com1

cloudmasonry.com1

conga.com1

docs.oracle.com1

fastslowmotion.com1

inspireplanner.com1

linkedin.com1

monday.com1

pandadoc.com1

Ten of the ten domain citations in answers naming PROS came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

bettercommerce.io/blog/how-to-evaluate-cpq-software1

cincom.com/blog/cpq/best-cpq-tools1

cincom.com/blog/cpq/cpq-project-success1

cloudmasonry.com/salesforce-cpq-alternatives1

conga.com/press/conga-recognized-2026-gartner-magic-quadrant-configure-price-and-quote-app1

conga.com/salesforce1

docs.oracle.com/en/cloud/saas/configure-price-quote1

fastslowmotion.com/cpq-red-flags1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as PROS

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

PROS CPQ 2

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 PROS'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 PROS, 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 prospeo.io 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.