Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 62 → 40 of 49
1 category · Named, not rankedQlikView
3Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
3 / 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
2 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. QlikView was named 2 times in BI & dashboards, where Microsoft Power BI led with 52%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market42 of 52
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise24 of 55
0%1 label
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 QlikView 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dashboards and data visualization | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 42 of 52 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Power BI at 52% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, QlikView held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · BI & dashboards · by segment
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BI & dashboards | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 62 → 42 of 52 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated QlikView across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated QlikView across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 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
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 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.
“legacy product entering end-of-support on October 31, 2026, so starting new projects on it would be a serious mistake” DeepSeek V4 Flash · BI & dashboards · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as QlikView, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and QlikView was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as QlikView, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and QlikView was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 QlikView. 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 2 of the 3 answers that named QlikView and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
selecthub.com2
analyticsinsight.net1
astrato.io1
axis-intelligence.com1
barc.com1
bobj-board.org1
capterra.com1
checkthat.ai1
cxpa.org1
diva-portal.org1
Eleven of the eleven domain citations in answers naming QlikView came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
qlik.com ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, QlikView takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Power BI takes 52%.ShowHide
Search and answers
qlik.com ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, QlikView takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Power BI takes 52%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “business intelligence and dashboard tool”
1
Position for “best business intelligence and dashboard tool”
–
not in the top ten
- Organic visits to its site
- about 705,831 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 20,174 · 2,359 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 23,472
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 42 of 52 in BI & dashboards
Segment leader
52%
Microsoft Power BI
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 3 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 2 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on qlik.com
9,979
subdomains included
Content
3,723
counted in the table below
Documentation
1,143
Product · Integration
126 · 7
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 3,081 | 6 | 2026-09-14 | ||
| News or press | 435 | undated | |||
| Case study | 115 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 31 | 0 | 2025-11-17 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 18 | 6 | 2026-09-25 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 15 | 6 | 2026-09-25 | ||
| Conference or event | 14 | 0 | 2026-03-23 | ||
| Report or ebook | 9 | 2 | 2026-09-25 | ||
| Template or tool | 5 | 0 | 2026-02-06 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-25What is new QlikSense glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-25What is new May2026 glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-25What is new Nov2025 glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-25What is new May2025 glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-25What is new Nov2024 glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-25What is new May2024 glossary or explainer
Events in person
Last twelve months
- September 30, 2026AWS SummitDubai, UAE · exhibited
- September 3, 2026AWS SummitSão Paulo, Brazil · exhibited
- August 12, 2026AWS SummitMexico City, Mexico · exhibited
- June 30, 2026AWS SummitWashington, USA · exhibited
- June 17, 2026AWS SummitNew York, USA · exhibited
- June 3, 2026AWS SummitToronto, Canada · exhibited
- May 28, 2026AWS SummitMilan, Italy · exhibited
- May 20, 2026AWS SummitHamburg, Germany · exhibited
- May 13, 2026 to May 14, 2026AWS SummitSydney, Australia · exhibited
- April 22, 2026AWS SummitLondon, UK · exhibited
- April 1, 2026AWS SummitParis, France · exhibited
As the event pages on qlik.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page qlik.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as QlikView
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as QlikView; a claim can dispute any of them.
QlikView/Qlik Sense 1
Follow QlikView
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.
The company
Qlik is the company behind QlikView.ShowHide
The company
Qlik is the company behind QlikView.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- qlik.com
- Headquarters
- King of Prussia, United States
- Founded
- 1993
- Ownership
- Public, QLIK on Nasdaq
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · 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 QlikView'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 QlikView, 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 QlikView by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where QlikView 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 QlikView, 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.