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 194 → 150 of 161
SAP Master Data Governance
22Judge labels
0First choices
11Negative labels
11 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
7 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SAP Master Data Governance was named 7 times in DMP and 1 other category, where Segment led with 37%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business159 of 171
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market90 of 159
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise112 of 151
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
In dmp · 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 Master Data Governance 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data management platforms | GTM data and infrastructure | 0% | 90 of 159 | 25% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Segment at 37% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Product information management | Revenue operations | 0% | 68 of 68 | 100% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Plytix at 34% |
Movement
Since September 2026, SAP Master Data Governance held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · DMP · 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 82 → 130 of 150
Enterprise=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 49 → 100 of 137
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DMP | 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 82 → 90 of 159 |
| PIM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 68 of 68, 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 Master Data Governance 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 Master Data Governance 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative10 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative11 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative22 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.
“Enterprise data management for large organizations, master data governance as a core use case.” Muse Glimmer 30B · DMP · 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.
“Older, monolithic systems (often legacy versions of SAP or Oracle MDM suites) installed on your own servers... these systems often become "white elephants"” Qwen 3.7 Flash · PIM · negative prompt · hard negative
“The "ERP-as-a-PIM" Trap (e.g., trying to use SAP, NetSuite, Microsoft Dynamics): ERPs are built for transaction records” Gemini 3.5 Flash · PIM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Large enterprise MDM/PIM suites such as SAP, Oracle, Stibo, or Informatica — if your needs are relatively simple.” GPT-6 Luna · PIM · negative prompt · soft negative
“Extremely complex, expensive to implement, and requires deep SAP expertise” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DMP · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP Master Data Governance, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Master Data Governance was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP Master Data Governance, over the 22 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Master Data Governance 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 Master Data Governance. 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 20 of the 22 answers that named SAP Master Data Governance and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
doit.software7
g2.com7
atropim.com5
atrocore.com4
estuary.dev4
forrester.com4
inriver.com4
linkedin.com4
ovaledge.com4
pimcore.com4
No domain is on file for SAP Master Data Governance, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where SAP Master Data Governance stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where SAP Master Data Governance stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,000 a month (“sap master data governance”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 12 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 90 of 159 in DMP
Segment leader
37%
Segment
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 22 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 Master Data Governance
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SAP Master Data Governance; a claim can dispute any of them.
SAP 3SAP Master Data Governance (MDG) 2SAP Master Data Governance / SAP Datasphere 1
Follow SAP Master Data Governance
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 Master Data Governance.ShowHide
The company
SAP is the company behind SAP Master Data Governance.
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 Master Data Governance'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 Master Data Governance, 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 Master Data Governance by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where SAP Master Data Governance 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 Master Data Governance, 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.