Gane Index
All indexesEvery index and its categoriesGTMMarketing, sales, customer and revenue operations softwareITSecurity, IT operations, cloud, developer and data softwareHRHR, payroll, recruiting, performance and learning softwareFinanceAccounting, planning, spend, billing and treasury software
Claim your listing
Index › Finance › Accounting and close › Financial close manageme › Numeric vs Planful
Financial close management · November 2026 Edition

Numeric vs Planful

Zero of fourteen models named Numeric first on the direct prompt; zero named Planful. Numeric was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Planful by eight and Numeric carries 44 labels and Planful 12, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Numeric

accepted challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

Planful

accepted challenger

Named in ten categories this edition.

First-choice share14%3%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate2%17%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#5A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels4412A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Numeric reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.FloQast was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. FloQast vs Numeric · FloQast vs Planful · Numeric vs Prophix

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 financial close management page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
NumericFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPlanful
Direct001 against Planful
Paraphrase30
Comparative00
Budget-constrained42
Scale-constrained10
Negative001 against Numeric · 1 against Planful
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 Numeric and Planful stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
Numeric Planful first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Numeric on the left and Planful on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Numeric and Planful stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Gemini 3.5 FlashFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric, Planful, Trintech Adra, Vena
Perplexity SonarFloQast alternatives: DOKKA Close, Numeric, Prophix, Trintech Adra
Qwen 3.7 FlashFloQast alternatives: Numeric, PivotXL, Prophix
GLM 4.7 FlashXProphix alternatives: Cube, FloQast, Numeric
GPT-6 LunaFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Numeric, Trintech Adra

Neither was named

9 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5FloQast alternatives: DOKKA Close, Trintech Adra
GPT-5.4 miniFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Vena
Grok 4.20FloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Prophix, Workiva
Mistral SmallFloQast, Prophix alternatives: BlackLine, DOKKA Close
DeepSeek V4 FlashFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Datarails, Prophix, Sage Intacct
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2FloQast alternatives: Prophix, Trintech Adra
MiniMax M2.5FloQast alternatives: Adra Suite, BlackLine, Sage Intacct, Trintech
Muse Glimmer 30BFloQast alternatives: BlackLine, Prophix, Trintech

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
Numeric leads by nineteen points.
Numeric19%#2 of 12
Planful0%#– of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Numeric leads by ten points.
Numeric14%#2 of 14
Planful3%#5 of 14
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Numeric leads by four points.
Numeric4%#5 of 12
Planful0%#– of 12
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Numeric

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.

“Numeric is not a top choice and has received criticism for lack of improvement.” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative
“Numeric and FloQast are the top recommendations due to their ease of use, strong automation, and good fit for mid-market needs” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Start with Numeric if: You're on a modern cloud ERP (especially NetSuite or QBO) and want more native automation” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“CloseCore Close Management or Numeric’s per-user tier is the lowest recurring cost.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Planful

No label in this category carried a quote.

Also compared
FloQast vs NumericFloQast vs PlanfulNumeric vs ProphixNumeric vs DOKKA CloseNumeric vs DatarailsNumeric vs BlackLineProphix vs PlanfulDOKKA Close vs PlanfulPlanful vs DatarailsPlanful vs BlackLineAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full financial close manageme 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.