Zero of fourteen models named SAP Signavio Process Intelligence first on the direct prompt; two named Celonis Process Intelligence Platform. Both were named by all fourteen models and SAP Signavio Process Intelligence carries 47 labels and Celonis Process Intelligence Platform 64, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
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 process mining page.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, SAP Signavio Process Intelligence and Celonis Process Intelligence Platform were named in the same answer 142 times, of the 144 answers naming SAP Signavio Process Intelligence and the 191 naming Celonis Process Intelligence Platform. In those answers Celonis Process Intelligence Platform took the first choice fifty-four times and SAP Signavio Process Intelligence four.
| Model | DirectSS | ParaphraseSS | ComparativeSS | Budget-constrainedSS | Scale-constrainedSS | NegativeSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | SS | SS | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | SS | SS | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | SS | SS | SS | SS | SS | |
| Perplexity Sonar | SS | SS | ||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | SS | SS | SS | SS | ||
| Mistral Small | SS | SS | SS | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | SS | SS | SS | SS | SS | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | SS | SS | SS | SS | ||
| Kimi K2 | SS | SS | SS | SS | SS | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | SS | SS | SS | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | SS | SS | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | SS | SS | SS | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | SS |
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.
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“SAP Signavio | $150K–$700K/year | Heavy SAP-native positioning; enterprise price tags” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · hard negative
“SAP Signavio ($150K–$700K/year) are far out of scope for most limited budgets” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“$150K–$700K/year — only makes sense if you're deeply invested in SAP.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · hard negative
“If your stack is primarily SAP and you are planning a massive ERP migration: Choose SAP Signavio.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“SAP Signavio for SAP-aligned process mining + modelling + simulation with collaborative governance” Muse Glimmer 30B · comparative prompt · first choice
“### 1. SAP Signavio – *Best if you use SAP or need end-to-end modeling*” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“What to Avoid (Unless You Have the Budget) ... Celonis | $60K–$100K/year + $40K–$80K implementation | Case-volume pricing adds up fast; opaque enterprise sales” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · hard negative
“What I would avoid on a limited budget: Celonis, IBM Process Mining, and similar enterprise suites” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · hard negative
“avoid enterprise-first tools like Celonis, which are often described as more expensive” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · hard negative
“The undisputed heavyweight market leader... If you have a highly complex, multi-vendor IT architecture and a large budget... Choose Celonis.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Celonis — The Market Leader ... Key Differentiator: Deep execution management with AI-powered recommendations and the broadest ecosystem” Kimi K2 · comparative prompt · first choice
“Celonis remains the undisputed heavyweight, commanding a 31.2% market share through its sophisticated Execution Management System (EMS)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
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.