Out nowThe Citation EconomyBuy on Amazon →

Subcategory · AI Citation Index

FP&A

The FP&A software market exhibits mature vendor consensus with 63 brands recognized and 12 actively evaluated, yet remarkably tight competitive clustering at the top. Anaplan edges ahead at 68% shortlist rate, but Planful and Workday Adaptive Planning trail by just 3 points—all three achieving maximum model diversity scores of 5, indicating broad AI model agreement on their positioning. Mid-tier challengers Cube, Pigment, and Board (55-59% shortlist rates) demonstrate viable alternatives, while the 15-point spread between leaders and the eighth-ranked vendor (Datarails at 49%) suggests a two-tier market structure where top platforms have achieved clear separation from the broader field.

179 discovery queries · 281 head-to-heads · refreshed Oct 22, 2026

Discovery stage

The shortlist

Across 179 buyer-style "FP&A" queries

42%49%56%64%71%Coverage — share of discovery prompts where the brand surfaces68%73%78%83%88%Engine diversity

Hover or click a logo to see brand details

X = coverage across discovery prompts · Y = engine diversity · Bubble size = total mentions
Tracked acrossChatGPT,Gemini,Claude

Get weekly AI visibility changes for FP&A sent to your inbox.

Score shifts, new entrants, citation gaps — every Monday.

Signal by intent

By topic

Top 5 most-cited brands per intent cluster. Brands with zero citations in a topic are not shown.

1Anaplan
8/8
2Workday Adaptive Planning
8/8
3Planful
8/8
4Cube
8/8
5Mosaic
8/8
1Anaplan
7/7
2Workday Adaptive Planning
7/7
3Planful
7/7
4Mosaic
7/7
5Workday
7/7
1Board
7/7
2Microsoft
7/7
3Workday Adaptive Planning
7/7
4Datarails
7/7
5Anaplan
7/7
1SAP
4/5
2Workday Adaptive Planning
4/5
3Workday
4/5
4Netsuite
4/5
5Sage Intacct
4/5
1Anaplan
5/5
2Workday Adaptive Planning
5/5
3Planful
5/5
4Datarails
5/5
5Netsuite
5/5
1Anaplan
5/5
2SAP
5/5
3Netsuite
5/5
4Workday Adaptive Planning
5/5
5Workday
5/5
1Cube
5/5
2Planful
5/5
3Anaplan
5/5
4Workday Adaptive Planning
5/5
5Pigment
5/5
1Anaplan
5/5
2Workday Adaptive Planning
5/5
3SAP
5/5
4Planful
5/5
5Vena Solutions
5/5
≥50% cited
25–49%
<25%
Topics are discovery-stage prompt clusters · fp-a

Evaluation stage

Head-to-head

How often AI cites each brand across uniform category evaluation prompts · median 6/100

0255075100Evaluation citation rate — % of category evaluation prompts citing this brand07132026Evaluation prompts cited inmedian citation ratemedian exposure

Hover or click a logo to see brand details

X = evaluation citation rate · Y = evaluation prompts cited in · Bubble size = citation exposure
Median citation rate 6/100

Each brand's score is the share of category evaluation prompts where AI cited them across all four engines — the same prompt pool for every brand. Brands above the median citation rate have stronger presence in evaluation-stage queries.

Citation sources

Where AI pulls citations from

660 citations captured across FP&A prompt runs.

Vendor pages

319

Product, help, and marketing pages from tracked vendors

Independent sources

199

Reviews, encyclopedias, forums, press — not vendor-owned

Buyer questions

What AI cites for top FP&A questions

Most-cited prompts across the buyer journey. Click any prompt to see the actual URLs AI engines link to.

Discovery

Buyers exploring the category

Evaluation

Buyers comparing options

Want to know if AI cites your brand for FP&A?

Free audit. ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude.

Run an audit →

See the full FP&A leaderboard →