Embedded analytics · October 2026 Edition
Sisense vs ThoughtSpot Embedded
Five of fourteen models named Sisense first on the direct prompt; one named ThoughtSpot Embedded. Sisense was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and ThoughtSpot Embedded by eleven and Sisense carries 39 labels and ThoughtSpot Embedded 36, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share15%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate28%19%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#5A position in a field of 19; printed, not drawn.
Labels3936A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Sisense reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Metabase vs Sisense · Metabase vs ThoughtSpot Embedded · Sisense vs Luzmo
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 embedded analytics page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
SisenseFirst choices, of fourteen modelsThoughtSpot Embedded
Direct511 against Sisense · 1 against ThoughtSpot Embedded
Paraphrase312 against Sisense · 1 against ThoughtSpot Embedded
Comparative22
Budget-constrained002 against Sisense · 2 against ThoughtSpot Embedded
Scale-constrained012 against Sisense
Negative004 against Sisense · 3 against ThoughtSpot Embedded
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.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Sisense and ThoughtSpot Embedded were named in the same answer sixty-two times, of the 102 answers naming Sisense and the 94 naming ThoughtSpot Embedded. In those answers ThoughtSpot Embedded took the first choice four times and Sisense nine.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Sisense and ThoughtSpot Embedded 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 4.1 Fast | | | | | ||
| 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 | | |
Sisense ThoughtSpot Embedded first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Sisense on the left and ThoughtSpot Embedded on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Sisense and ThoughtSpot Embedded stood in it.
Sisense first, ThoughtSpot Embedded an alternative
5 of 14 modelsThoughtSpot Embedded was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Sisense alternatives: Holistics, Looker Embedded, Metabase, Power BI Embedded
GPT-5.4 miniSisense alternatives: Looker, Power BI Embedded, ThoughtSpot Embedded
Mistral SmallExplo, Sisense alternatives: Microsoft Power BI Embedded, Tableau Embedded Analytics
Qwen 3.7 FlashSisense alternatives: Looker, Microsoft Power BI Embedded, ThoughtSpot Embedded
Muse Glimmer 30BSisense alternatives: Reveal BI, Toucan
ThoughtSpot Embedded first, Sisense not the choice
1 of 14 modelsSisense was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Perplexity SonarThoughtSpot Embedded alternatives: Cube, Looker, Zoho Analytics
Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.DeepSeek V4 FlashLuzmo alternatives: GoodData, Sisense
GLM 4.7 FlashXMetabase alternatives: Looker, ThoughtSpot Embedded
MiniMax M2.5Microsoft Power BI Embedded alternatives: Cube, Explo, Grow, Looker, Metabase, Sisense, Tableau Embedded Analytics, ThoughtSpot Embedded
GPT-6 LunaMetabase alternatives: Looker Embed, Sisense, ThoughtSpot Embedded
Neither was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Gemini 3.5 FlashOmni alternatives: Embeddable, Luzmo, Metabase, Qrvey
Grok 4.1 FastReveal BI alternatives: Bold BI, Domo Everywhere, Power BI Embedded, Tableau, Zoho Analytics
Llama 4 MaverickReveal BI alternatives: Cube.dev, Omni.co, Thinklytics Insights, Zoho
Kimi K2Explo alternatives: Looker, Metabase, Power BI Embedded, Preset
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
Level: the same share of first choices.
Sisense0%#15 of 17ThoughtSpot Embedded0%#12 of 17Mid-marketThe figures above
Sisense leads by nine points.
Sisense15%#2 of 19ThoughtSpot Embedded5%#5 of 19Enterprise
Sisense leads by eleven points.
Sisense13%#2 of 15ThoughtSpot Embedded2%#10 of 15What the models said about Sisense
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“A catastrophic, highly publicized supply chain data breach in April 2024.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid: Enterprise platforms like Tableau, Looker, or Sisense” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Enterprise-grade tools (like Looker, Sisense, or Tableau) often require complex sales negotiations and five-to-six-figure annual contracts.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“Sisense is widely considered the strongest all-around contender due to its balance of price, ease of integration, and powerful visualization engine.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Best for mid-market SaaS products that want a turnkey embedded solution; teams without ecosystem commitments to Microsoft or Salesforce” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Sisense and Explo are the strongest contenders, with Sisense leading for technical flexibility” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about ThoughtSpot Embedded
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid: Looker, Domo, ThoughtSpot, and GoodData if budget is your primary constraint” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“ThoughtSpot — embedded but still iframe/API oriented, with limitations around flexibility and governance overhead” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“were primarily built for internal analyst teams, not customer-facing embedding” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“I would choose ThoughtSpot Embedded for a typical mid-market B2B company that wants a mature platform and quicker adoption.” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · first choice
“ThoughtSpot is positioned as an AI-native analytics platform... ThoughtSpot wins on pure AI and ease of use” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best overall balance for product-led customer facing analytics: Sigma Embedded or ThoughtSpot Embedded” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared
Metabase vs SisenseMetabase vs ThoughtSpot EmbeddedSisense vs LuzmoSisense vs ExploSisense vs CubeSisense vs GoodDataSisense vs Apache SupersetLuzmo vs ThoughtSpot EmbeddedExplo vs ThoughtSpot EmbeddedThoughtSpot Embedded vs CubeThoughtSpot Embedded vs GoodDataThoughtSpot Embedded vs Apache SupersetAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full embedded analytics 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.