| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RFP response software | Sales | 0% | 17 of 82 | 21% | 33 | accepted challenger | |
| Proposal software | Revenue operations | 0% | 44 of 56 | 40% | 5 | under 10 labels · led by PandaDoc at 65% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Qvidian is the robust, traditional choice... Trade-off: It typically requires more implementation time and a higher budget” Qwen 3.7 Flash · RFP response · direct prompt · alternative
“Deep Microsoft/Word integration. However, implementation can take 3–6 months, and the UI is often considered dated” DeepSeek V4 Flash · RFP response · comparative prompt · alternative
“Qvidian/Uplvand is best for Mid-to-large enterprises [100+ users] with global customers, complex tech stacks” Muse Glimmer 30B · RFP response · scale prompt · alternative
“*RFPIO / Qualia (formerly Qvidian)*: Very powerful, heavy analytics, but steep learning curve.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · RFP response · scale prompt · alternative
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.
“described as having "uninspiring user interface, awkward workflows, and underdeveloped AI capabilities"” Kimi K2 · RFP response · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid enterprise-heavy like Upland Qvidian unless you need deep proposal automation.” Grok 4.20 · RFP response · direct prompt · hard negative
“Established giants like Upland Qvidian, and historically older setups of Loopio or Responsive ... are powerful but require massive upkeep.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · RFP response · negative prompt · soft negative
“Its AI features are flawed, with many users complaining about inaccurate content recommendations through its "Auto-Answer" technology.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · RFP response · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 124 of the 127 answers that named Upland Qvidian and are not a share of its labels.
504 of the 504 domain citations in answers naming Upland Qvidian came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 3,974 | 1 | 2026-09-28 | SEO, Direct mail | |
| Case study | 434 | 2 | 2026-09-23 | Direct mail | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 399 | 10 | 2026-09-18 | Proposals, CRM | |
| News or press | 375 | 0 | 2020-09-08 | CRM, Content marketing | |
| Report or ebook | 367 | 4 | 2026-09-25 | Mobile apps, Direct mail | |
| Glossary or explainer | 229 | 1 | 2026-08-05 | ||
| Conference or event | 160 | 1 | 2026-07-08 | ABM | |
| Podcast or video | 159 | 0 | 2023-03-23 | ||
| Comparison | 74 | 1 | 2026-09-14 | Content marketing, ABM | |
| Template or tool | 43 | 0 | 2025-09-16 | SEO |
Every page uplandsoftware.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Of its titles that name a category, most name SEO (20); 0 name its categories the models place it in. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
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.
What Upland Qvidian's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: uplandsoftware.com, uplandsoftware.com/adestra/pricing, trust.uplandsoftware.com, uplandsoftware.com/products, uplandsoftware.com/objectiflune/customers. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Upland Qvidian'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 Upland Qvidian, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Upland Qvidian by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: