Small business=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 59 → 50 of 52
SAP CPQ
86Judge labels
3First choices
29Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
4Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in CPQ for enterprise buyers
Rank 27 of 66 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 38% of its 26 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of SAP CPQ →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business52 of 54
0%11 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market27 of 66
0%26 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise4 of 49
4%43 labels
accepted challenger
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 SAP CPQ 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPQ | Revenue operations | 0% | 27 of 66 | 38% | 26 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Pricing optimization | Revenue operations | 0% | 60 of 76 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Pricefx at 53% | |
| Proposal software | Revenue operations | 0% | 54 of 56 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by PandaDoc at 65% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Territory and quota planning | Revenue operations | 0% | 95 of 123 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by CaptivateIQ Planning at 36% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, SAP CPQ held within the floor in all four categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · CPQ · by segment
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 55 → 25 of 62
Enterprise▼−4Since September 2026: 6% → 2%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 6% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 4 → 6 of 41
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPQ | 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 55 → 27 of 66 |
| Pricing optimization | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 60 of 76, unchanged |
| Proposals | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 54 of 56, unchanged |
| Territory planning | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 95 of 123, unchanged |
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 SAP CPQ 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 SAP CPQ 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 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
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
Direct10 labelsNone
Paraphrase14 labels2
Comparative25 labelsNone
Budget-constrained6 labels1
Scale-constrained6 labelsNone
Negative25 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative86 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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 if your pricing and product logic are highly complex... though it can be more maintenance-heavy” GPT-5.4 mini · CPQ · direct prompt · alternative
“consistently held a "Leader" position in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for several years” Qwen 3.7 Flash · CPQ · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best for: Large enterprises with diverse product lines and international sales needs.” Mistral Small · CPQ · comparative prompt · alternative
“Companies already invested in SAP, particularly those selling configurable products” GPT-6 Luna · 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.
“Examples: Salesforce CPQ, Oracle NetSuite, SAP. * Why to avoid: ... notoriously difficult to configure.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Proposals · negative prompt · hard negative
“If you are not already deeply embedded in the SAP ecosystem (S/4HANA, ECC), avoid.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · CPQ · negative prompt · hard negative
“Oracle/SAP CPQ: Only if you're already locked into those ERP ecosystems.” Kimi K2 · CPQ · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“SAP CPQ has frequent complaints about steep learning curves, complex setup, slow performance, and less-intuitive UI/UX” GLM 4.7 FlashX · CPQ · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP CPQ, over the 86 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP CPQ was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP CPQ, over the 86 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP CPQ 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 SAP CPQ. 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 83 of the 86 answers that named SAP CPQ and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
qobra.co45
conga.com32
monday.com31
albato.com29
g2.com29
guideflow.com29
salesbricks.com27
everstage.com26
dealhub.io22
pandadoc.com22
No domain is on file for SAP CPQ, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where SAP CPQ stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where SAP CPQ stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 320 a month (“sap cpq”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 25 a month
- Its own site
- No site of its own on file, so no site figures
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 27 of 66 in CPQ
Segment leader
57%
DealHub
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 86 answers
- Its own site cited
- No site on file to match
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.
Names read as SAP CPQ
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SAP CPQ; a claim can dispute any of them.
SAP 2Oracle/SAP CPQ 1SAP CPQ (formerly CallidusCloud) 1
Follow SAP CPQ
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
SAP is the company behind SAP CPQ.ShowHide
The company
SAP is the company behind SAP CPQ.
ShowHideOn record
Wikidata- Website
- sap.com
- Headquarters
- Walldorf, Germany
- Founded
- 1972
- Employees
- about 106,043 (2023)
- Ownership
- Public, SAP on Italian Stock Exchange
- Also from SAP
- SAP Address Validation, SAP Analytics Cloud, SAP Ariba, SAP Ariba CLM, SAP Ariba Contracts, SAP Billing, SAP Build Process Automation, SAP Business One and 40 more
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 CPQ'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 CPQ, 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 SAP CPQ by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where SAP CPQ 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 SAP CPQ, 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.