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 106 → 90 of 94
SAP Territory and Quota
15Judge labels
2First choices
4Negative labels
10 / 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
4 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SAP Territory and Quota was named 4 times in Territory planning, where CaptivateIQ Planning led with 36%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business99 of 103
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market108 of 123
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise6 of 92
3%9 labels
under the label threshold
In territory planning · 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 Territory and Quota 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Territory and quota planning | Revenue operations | 0% | 108 of 123 | 50% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by CaptivateIQ Planning at 36% | =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, SAP Territory and Quota held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Territory planning · 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 69 → 101 of 116
Enterprise▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 12 → 5 of 83
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Territory planning | 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 69 → 108 of 123 |
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 Territory and Quota 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 Territory and Quota 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 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
Direct6 labels2
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative4 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained2 labelsNone
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative15 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.
“Streamlines equitable quotas and territory optimization for revenue max.” Grok 4.20 · Territory planning · direct 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.
“they require months of implementation, heavy IT lift, and dedicated administrators” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Territory planning · direct prompt · soft negative
“SAP has some 3.5/5 reviews citing limited customization/flexibility.” Grok 4.20 · Territory planning · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP Territory and Quota, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Territory and Quota was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as SAP Territory and Quota, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAP Territory and Quota 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 Territory and Quota. 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 15 of the 15 answers that named SAP Territory and Quota and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
guideflow.com14
captivateiq.com12
pipeline.zoominfo.com11
learn.g2.com8
gitnux.org6
varicent.com6
worldmetrics.org5
zipdo.co5
articsledge.com4
bitscale.ai4
No domain is on file for SAP Territory and Quota, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Names read as SAP Territory and Quota
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as SAP Territory and Quota; a claim can dispute any of them.
SAP SuccessFactors Territory and Quota 2SAP SuccessFactors Territory & Quota 1
Follow SAP Territory and Quota
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 Territory and Quota.ShowHide
The company
SAP is the company behind SAP Territory and Quota.
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 Territory and Quota'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 Territory and Quota, 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 Territory and Quota by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where SAP Territory and Quota 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 Territory and Quota, 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.