Every category where a model named SAP Commissions 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
Sales commissions and incentive compensation	Revenue operations	0%	49 of 51	71%	7	under 10 labels · led by Everstage at 25%
Territory and quota planning	Revenue operations	0%	102 of 103	80%	5	under 10 labels · led by CaptivateIQ at 30%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SAP Commissions 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 SAP Commissions 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	2	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	2	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	1	1
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	0	1

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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase7 labelsNone

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative17 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative37 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.

“Best when tied into SAP landscape and enterprise processes.” GPT-5.4 mini · Commissions · 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.

“Legacy ERP Modules (Standalone SAP/Oracle Modules) ... Why to Avoid: These are generally rigid, slow to update” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Territory planning · negative prompt · hard negative

“Best avoided by: Non-SAP shops, smaller organizations, teams wanting quick implementation” Kimi K2 · Commissions · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid enterprise platforms like Xactly, SAP Commissions, CaptivateIQ” Perplexity Sonar · Commissions · budget prompt · hard negative

“Avoid enterprise-heavy like Xactly/SAP unless scaling globally soon.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Territory planning · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SAP Commissions, over the 37 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Commissions was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CaptivateIQ30 of 376Not in the top three

Varicent24 of 375Not in the top three

Everstage20 of 374Not in the top three

QuotaPath18 of 376Not in the top three

Xactly18 of 374Not in the top three

Anaplan18 of 370Not in the top three

Salesforce Spiff18 of 370Not in the top three

Performio13 of 371Not in the top three

Xactly Incent11 of 371Not in the top three

Qobra10 of 371Not 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 SAP Commissions. 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 8 of the 37 answers that named SAP Commissions and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

captivateiq.com7

everstage.com7

forma.ai5

guideflow.com4

qobra.co4

quotapath.com4

salesforce.com4

getcentify.com3

selecthub.com3

visdum.com3

Forty-four of the forty-four domain citations in answers naming SAP Commissions came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

everstage.com/10-best-commission-management-software4

everstage.com/10-best-sales-commission-software4

qobra.co/blog/top-sales-commission-tools4

forma.ai/resources/article/commissions-software3

forma.ai/resources/article/incentive-compensation-management-software3

getcentify.com/best-sales-commission-software3

guideflow.com/blog/sales-commission-software3

selecthub.com/c/sales-commission-software3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as SAP Commissions

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

SAP 5SAP SuccessFactors Incentive Management 2SAP SuccessFactors Incentive Management / SAP Commissions 1

The company

SAP is the company behind SAP Commissions.

Website: sap.com
Headquarters: Walldorf, Germany
Founded: 1972
Employees: about 106,043 (2023)
Ownership: Public, SAP on Italian 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 · 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 SAP Commissions'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 SAP Commissions, 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 sapcommissions.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.