Account reconciliation · November 2026 Edition
QuickBooks Online vs Numeric
Zero of fourteen models named QuickBooks Online first on the direct prompt; two named Numeric. QuickBooks Online was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Numeric by twelve and QuickBooks Online carries 30 labels and Numeric 27, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in twenty-three categories this edition.
Named in four categories this edition.
First-choice share13%3%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate10%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#8A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels3027A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, QuickBooks Online reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.FloQast was named alongside these two in fourteen of the fourteen direct answers. FloQast vs QuickBooks Online · FloQast vs Numeric · Xero vs QuickBooks Online
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the account reconciliation page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
QuickBooks OnlineFirst choices, of fourteen modelsNumeric
Direct02
Paraphrase101 against QuickBooks Online
Comparative20
Budget-constrained701 against QuickBooks Online
Scale-constrained00
Negative001 against QuickBooks Online
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where QuickBooks Online and Numeric stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-5.4 mini | ||||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | ||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | |||
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | | |||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | ||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | |||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | |
QuickBooks Online Numeric first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, QuickBooks Online on the left and Numeric on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where QuickBooks Online and Numeric stood in it.
Numeric first, QuickBooks Online not the choice
2 of 14 modelsQuickBooks Online was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.DeepSeek V4 FlashFloQast, Numeric alternatives: Prophix One, Trintech
MiniMax M2.5FloQast, Numeric alternatives: Trintech Adra
Neither was the first choice, one was named
9 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Trintech Adra alternatives: FloQast, Numeric, Prophix One
Gemini 3.5 FlashFloQast alternatives: BlackLine Transaction Matching, Numeric, Trintech Adra, ZoneReconcile
Perplexity SonarFloQast alternatives: HighRadius, Numeric, Prophix One, Trintech Adra
Mistral SmallFloQast alternatives: Numeric, Prophix One, Trintech Adra
Llama 4 MaverickFloQast alternatives: BlackLine Transaction Matching, Numeric, Prophix One, Trintech Adra
Kimi K2FloQast alternatives: DOKKA, Numeric, Trintech
GLM 4.7 FlashXProphix One alternatives: FloQast, Numeric, Trintech Adra
GPT-6 LunaFloQast alternatives: BlackLine Transaction Matching, Numeric, Trintech Adra
Muse Glimmer 30BProphix One alternatives: BlackLine Transaction Matching, DOKKA, FloQast, Numeric, Trintech
Neither was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniBlackLine Transaction Matching alternatives: FloQast, Trintech
Grok 4.20FloQast alternatives: BlackLine Transaction Matching, Datarails, Prophix One, Trintech
Qwen 3.7 FlashBlackLine Transaction Matching alternatives: FloQast, ReconArt, Syft, Vena
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
QuickBooks Online leads by forty-four points.
QuickBooks Online47%#1 of 10Numeric3%#6 of 10Mid-marketThe figures above
QuickBooks Online leads by ten points.
QuickBooks Online13%#3 of 15Numeric3%#8 of 15Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
QuickBooks Online0%#– of 10Numeric0%#8 of 10What the models said about QuickBooks Online
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“Best overall bank reconciliation for small businesses... QuickBooks Online from ~$35-38/mo or Xero from ~$25/mo give the most complete bank-feed + automatic matching experience” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“QuickBooks Online is a complete, all-around bank reconciliation system that is suitable for businesses that need a comprehensive solution.” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Numeric
No label in this category carried a quote.
Also compared
FloQast vs QuickBooks OnlineFloQast vs NumericXero vs QuickBooks OnlineXero vs NumericQuickBooks Online vs Zoho BooksQuickBooks Online vs Trintech AdraQuickBooks Online vs Prophix OneQuickBooks Online vs BlackLine Transaction MatchingZoho Books vs NumericTrintech Adra vs NumericProphix One vs NumericBlackLine Transaction Matching vs NumericAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full account reconciliation standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.