Every category where a model named SharePoint 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
Knowledge base and self-service	Customer	0%	96 of 96	83%	6	under 10 labels · led by Notion at 18%
Digital asset management	Marketing	0%	65 of 68	100%	3	under 10 labels · led by Canto at 34%
Contract lifecycle management and e-signature	Revenue operations	0%	60 of 65	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by PandaDoc at 25%
Customer success platforms	Customer	0%	37 of 69	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by ChurnZero at 39%
Digital sales rooms	Sales	0%	50 of 59	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Aligned at 40%
Proposal software	Revenue operations	0%	73 of 79	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by PandaDoc at 49%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for SharePoint 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 SharePoint 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	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	3	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	4	5
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative21 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative36 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.

“Lowest cost; channel-per-client structure; enough for up to ~100 active clients” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Customer success · paraphrase 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.

“using a DMS like SharePoint...Why to avoid: ...these tools fundamentally lack the relational database structures necessary for modern contracting.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · CLM · negative prompt · hard negative

“What to avoid/be cautious about: Trying to use Microsoft SharePoint, Google Drive, OneDrive, or Dropbox as your primary DAM.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · DAM · negative prompt · hard negative

“SharePoint (unless heavily customized by a dedicated developer) is often treated as a glorified, hard-to-navigate fileshare.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Knowledge base · negative prompt · hard negative

“Collaboration platforms with recurring high-severity vulnerabilities (SharePoint, Confluence)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Knowledge base · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SharePoint, over the 36 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SharePoint was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Confluence19 of 364Not in the top three

Notion19 of 363Not in the top three

Guru16 of 361Not in the top three

Document36014 of 363Not in the top three

Bloomfire12 of 360Not in the top three

Slite12 of 360Not in the top three

Google Drive10 of 360Not in the top three

Helpjuice9 of 362Not in the top three

Zendesk8 of 360Not in the top three

Tettra7 of 360Not 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 SharePoint. 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 4 of the 36 answers that named SharePoint and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

egain.com3

slite.com3

bloomfire.com2

monday.com2

thedigitalprojectmanager.com2

zendesk.com2

assembly.com1

context-clue.com1

eesel.ai1

guideflow.com1

Eighteen of the eighteen domain citations in answers naming SharePoint came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

egain.com/best-knowledge-base-software-20263

slite.com/learn/knowledge-base-softwares3

bloomfire.com/blog/best-knowledge-base-software2

monday.com/blog/service/enterprise-knowledge-base-platforms2

thedigitalprojectmanager.com/tools/best-enterprise-knowledge-base-software2

assembly.com/blog/best-knowledge-base-software1

bloomfire.com/blog/best-enterprise-knowledge-management-software1

context-clue.com/blog/10-best-knowledge-base-softwares-for-enterprise-in-20261

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as SharePoint

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

Microsoft SharePoint 2Microsoft Power Automate + SharePoint 1SharePoint (Unconfigured/Standard) 1Teams + SharePoint + Power BI 1

The company

Microsoft is the company behind SharePoint.

Website: microsoft.com
Headquarters: Vancouver, Canada
Founded: 1975
Employees: about 228,000 (2024)
Ownership: Public, 4338 on Hong Kong 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 · LinkedIn · 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 SharePoint'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 SharePoint, 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 sharepoint.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.