Financial reporting and dashboards · November 2026 Edition
Prophix vs Xero Analytics
Two of fourteen models named Prophix first on the direct prompt; zero named Xero Analytics. Prophix was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Xero Analytics by thirteen and Prophix carries 14 labels and Xero Analytics 17, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in eight categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share7%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 18; printed, not drawn.
Labels1417A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Prophix reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Sage Intacct was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Sage Intacct vs Prophix · Sage Intacct vs Xero Analytics · Wave 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 reporting and dashboards page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
ProphixFirst choices, of fourteen modelsXero Analytics
Direct20
Paraphrase20
Comparative00
Budget-constrained031 against Xero Analytics
Scale-constrained001 against Xero Analytics
Negative00
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 Prophix and Xero Analytics 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 | | |
Prophix Xero Analytics first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Prophix on the left and Xero Analytics on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Prophix and Xero Analytics stood in it.
Prophix first, Xero Analytics not the choice
2 of 14 modelsXero Analytics was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-6 LunaProphix alternatives: Planful, Sage Intacct, Vena
Muse Glimmer 30BProphix alternatives: Maxio, Planful, Sage Intacct
Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Sage Intacct alternatives: Datarails, Planful, Prophix, Vena
Perplexity SonarSage Intacct alternatives: Limelight, Maxio, Oracle NetSuite, Prophix, Vena
Neither was named
10 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniSage Intacct alternatives: Datarails, Oracle NetSuite, Workday Adaptive Planning, Workiva
Gemini 3.5 FlashMosaic, Pigment alternatives: Cube, Datarails, Planful, Sage Intacct
Grok 4.20Sage Intacct alternatives: Workday Adaptive Planning, Workiva
Mistral SmallOracle NetSuite, Sage Intacct alternatives: Datarails, Fathom
DeepSeek V4 FlashSage Intacct alternatives: Datarails, Oracle NetSuite, Vena, Workday Adaptive Planning
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashSage Intacct alternatives: Datarails, Maxio, Oracle NetSuite, Simetrik, Vena
Kimi K2Sage Intacct alternatives: Oracle NetSuite, Workday Adaptive Planning
GLM 4.7 FlashXOracle NetSuite alternatives: Datarails, Sage Intacct
MiniMax M2.5Datarails alternatives: Centage, Sage Intacct, Workday Adaptive Planning
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
Xero Analytics leads by thirteen points.
Xero Analytics13%#3 of 11Prophix0%#– of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Prophix leads at mid-market.
Prophix7%#5 of 18Xero Analytics6%#6 of 18Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Prophix0%#– of 15Xero Analytics0%#– of 15What the models said about Prophix
No label in this category carried a quote.
What the models said about Xero Analytics
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“You have outgrown simple accounting software (like QuickBooks or Xero)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · scale prompt · soft negative
“good reporting and usability, but usually not the cheapest” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · soft negative
“QuickBooks Online and Xero are the top choices for small businesses with limited budgets” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
“the best financial reporting software is typically Zoho Books (with its free plan) or Xero” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · first choice
“Xero (Best Overall for Budget-Conscious Small Businesses)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
Sage Intacct vs ProphixSage Intacct vs Xero AnalyticsWave vs ProphixWave vs Xero AnalyticsZoho Books vs ProphixZoho Books vs Xero AnalyticsDatarails vs ProphixDatarails vs Xero AnalyticsProphix vs Microsoft Power BIProphix vs CubeXero Analytics vs Microsoft Power BIXero Analytics vs CubeAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full financial reporting 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.