FP&A platforms: what fourteen AI models recommend, and why, November 2026
Fourteen AI models were asked for FP&A software six ways each, on behalf of a small, a mid-market and an enterprise B2B company: 252 answers, in which a judge labeled 92 products. Eight of them carry at least 10 labels and a first choice, and are ranked. This guide walks the top eight in the order the mid-market standing puts them, with what the models said for and against each, in their words. Pigment leads at 19% of first choices, and the standing is contested.
At a glance
| Product | First-choice share | Negative rate | Labels | Leads for | Quadrant | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  Pigment | 19% | 14% | 44 | Mid-market | accepted challenger |
| 2 |  Prophix | 14% | 3% | 34 | none | accepted challenger |
| 3 |  Cube | 12% | 11% | 53 | Small business | accepted challenger |
| 4 |  Aleph | 9% | 0% | 25 | none | accepted challenger |
| 5 |  Planful | 7% | 15% | 54 | none | accepted challenger |
| 6 |  Workday Adaptive Planning | 7% | 35% | 62 | none | criticized challenger |
| 7 |  Vena | 5% | 22% | 49 | none | accepted challenger |
| 8 |  Jirav | 2% | 19% | 16 | none | accepted challenger |
The full standing, every product with 10 labels or more, is on the category page, with the products at zero and the ones warned against.
How a product gets on this list
The judge reads every answer
A product is on the record because a model named it in an answer and the judge labeled the naming: first choice, alternative, mention, caution or warning, each with the sentence it came from. 92 products were named for FP&A software this edition.
10 labels and a first choice
A product is ranked once it carries 10 labels in a segment and at least one first choice there. Below that it is named but not ranked, and it says so on its page. The vendor table that folds spellings into products is versioned; this page was scored under v2026-11.2.
The noise floor
The same categories are asked again with nothing changed to measure how much an answer moves on its own. A change in share smaller than the floor is not reported as a change. The repeat, model by model.
The six questions
| Framing | The question |
|---|---|
| Direct | What is the best FP&A software for a mid-market B2B company? |
| Paraphrase | Which financial planning and analysis platform would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B company? |
| Comparative | What are the top FP&A platforms and how do they differ? |
| Budget-constrained | What is the best FP&A software for a company with a limited budget? |
| Scale-constrained | We are a 500 person company evaluating a FP&A software. What should we look at? |
| Negative | Which FP&A platforms should I avoid or be cautious about? |
1. Pigment
Pigment is #1 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 19% of first choices, from 44 labels by 14 of 14 models; 14% of those labels were cautions or warnings. Eight of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. It led the direct framing. By buyer: small business unranked; mid-market #1 of 8 at 19%; enterprise #4 of 10 at 7%.
What the models said for it
“If you want the safest all-around choice for mid-market B2B, Pigment offers the best balance of power, modern UI, and scalability.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Pigment offers the best balance of modern functionality, ease of use, and mid-market pricing.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
And against it
“65% of FP&A professionals raising concerns about this platform... substantial negative sentiment among practitioners.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid the mid-market "contact us" vendors (Anaplan, Workday Adaptive Planning, Pigment, Planful)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
2. Prophix
Prophix is #2 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 14% of first choices, from 34 labels by 12 of 14 models; 3% of those labels were cautions or warnings. One of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. It led the paraphrase framing. By buyer: small business unranked; mid-market #2 of 8 at 14%; enterprise unranked.
What the models said for it
No positive label in this category carried a quote.
And against it
“Prophix often receives significantly fewer positive mentions and lower "positive-to-negative" ratios” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
3. Cube
Cube is #3 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 12% of first choices, from 53 labels by 13 of 14 models; 11% of those labels were cautions or warnings. One of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. It led the budget-constrained framing. By buyer: small business #1 of 11 at 24%; mid-market #3 of 8 at 12%; enterprise #7 of 10 at 4%.
What the models said for it
“The best FP&A software for a company with a limited budget is Cube, which offers a free plan and paid plans starting at $40-$80/user/mo.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
And against it
“Excel-adjacent tools like Datarails, Cube, and Vena may not be suitable for long-term scalability in large enterprises” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · soft negative
“median pricing for those lands in the $30,000+ range—typically too expensive for "limited budget" teams” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · soft negative
4. Aleph
Aleph is #4 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 9% of first choices, from 25 labels by 12 of 14 models; 0% of those labels were cautions or warnings. Three of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. It led the scale-constrained framing. By buyer: small business #5 of 11 at 5%; mid-market #4 of 8 at 9%; enterprise unranked.
What the models said for it
“I'd suggest starting with Aleph if your team is spreadsheet-centric and wants quick implementation” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Currently showing high market share... Look closely at Aleph or Cubesoftware.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
And against it
No negative label in this category carried a quote.
5. Planful
Planful is #5 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 7% of first choices, from 54 labels by 14 of 14 models; 15% of those labels were cautions or warnings. Three of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. By buyer: small business #11 of 11 at 2%; mid-market #5 of 8 at 7%; enterprise #6 of 10 at 4%.
8 of 14 models argued against it somewhere in their answers, 3 as a warning.
What the models said for it
“Planful is best for horizontal mid-market and enterprise finance teams that value packaged AI features and integrated FP&A plus close, and is a G2 Leader” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
And against it
“60% of FP&A professionals expressed criticism about Planful. Users report that "the planning feature was almost impossible to use".” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid the mid-market "contact us" vendors (Anaplan, Workday Adaptive Planning, Pigment, Planful)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
6. Workday Adaptive Planning
Workday Adaptive Planning is #6 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 7% of first choices, from 62 labels by 14 of 14 models; 35% of those labels were cautions or warnings. One of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. By buyer: small business unranked; mid-market #6 of 8 at 7%; enterprise #3 of 10 at 11%.
12 of 14 models argued against it somewhere in their answers, 3 as a warning.
What the models said for it
“Workday Adaptive Planning and Prophix One are the most recommended due to their balance of functionality, scalability, and user-friendliness” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
And against it
“Avoid the mid-market "contact us" vendors (Anaplan, Workday Adaptive Planning, Pigment, Planful)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
7. Vena
Vena is #7 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 5% of first choices, from 49 labels by 14 of 14 models; 22% of those labels were cautions or warnings. One of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. By buyer: small business unranked; mid-market #7 of 8 at 5%; enterprise #10 of 10 at 2%.
9 of 14 models argued against it somewhere in their answers, 5 as a warning.
What the models said for it
No positive label in this category carried a quote.
And against it
“Extremely slow performance (e.g., single-cell updates taking 20+ minutes)... many call it "the worst decision"” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Vena is criticized mainly for scalability and being Excel-in-the-cloud” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
8. Jirav
Jirav is #8 of 8 for the mid-market buyer at 2% of first choices, from 16 labels by 10 of 14 models; 19% of those labels were cautions or warnings. Zero of fourteen models named it first on the direct question. By buyer: small business #2 of 11 at 19%; mid-market #8 of 8 at 2%; enterprise unranked.
What the models said for it
“Jirav is an affordable entry point for small businesses ... making it a relatively cost-effective choice” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
And against it
“Be careful with "from $50/month" Jirav pricing: the public plans are described as being for FP&A advisory practices” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · soft negative
Where the models split
By framing, mid-market buyer
| Framing | Named first most often | Then |
|---|---|---|
| Direct | Pigment 8 of 14 models | Aleph (3), Planful (3), Abacum (1) |
| Paraphrase | Prophix 6 of 14 models | Pigment (3), Workday Adaptive Planning (3), Aleph (1) |
| Comparative |  Anaplan 4 of 14 models | Board (2), OneStream (1), Oracle Fusion Cloud EPM (1) |
| Budget-constrained | Cube 6 of 14 models | PlanGuru (3), Excel (2), Fairview (1) |
| Scale-constrained | Aleph 1 of 14 models | Prophix (1), Vena (1) |
| Negative | Anaplan 1 of 14 models | Datarails (1), Pigment (1) |
By buyer
Questions the record answers
Which FP&A software do AI models name first most often?
Pigment, in 19% of first choices for a mid-market B2B company in the November 2026 Edition, from 44 labels. The standing is contested: the models did not settle on one product.
Does the answer change with the size of the company?
Small business: Cube at 24%. Mid-market: Pigment at 19%. Enterprise: Anaplan at 49%. Each standing is computed within its segment and never pooled.
Which framing changes the answer?
The direct, paraphrase, budget and scale framings count toward share. The product named first differs by framing: direct Pigment; paraphrase Prophix; comparative Anaplan; budget-constrained Cube; scale-constrained Aleph; negative Anaplan. The table above has the counts.
How stable is one answer?
The repeat measurement is published with the next edition.
Where do the answers come from?
Fourteen of the fourteen models return sources. Their 75 answers here cite 771 pages; the sites cited most are getaleph.com, prophix.com, cfoshortlist.com. The category page lists them all.
Can a vendor pay to be on this list?
No. A product is on the record because a model named it. A vendor can claim its page, propose corrections to the vendor table and be told when its standing moves; it cannot change a label, a share or a rank, and the publisher's conflicts are disclosed on the method page.
The rest of the record on FP&A platforms
The page is published under CC BY 4.0. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.