Every category where a model named Celigo Integrator.io for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant	Since September 2026
EDI platforms	Data platform	0%	19 of 93	6%	31	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Celigo Integrator.io yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Celigo Integrator.io across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1	1	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	3	0	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	3	1	0	4
Mistral Small	0	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	2	1	3
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	1	1	1	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	3	1	0	4
MiniMax M2.5	0	3	0	0	3
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	2	0	0	2

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct13 labelsNone

Paraphrase8 labelsNone

Comparative11 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labels1

Scale-constrained10 labelsNone

Negative4 labels3not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative48 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 4 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Celigo – Strong ERP integration, visual workflow builder” Kimi K2 · EDI · negative prompt · first choice

“API-First EDI Platforms (e.g., Orderful, Cleo, Celigo)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · EDI · negative prompt · first choice

“Best For: Organizations already using Celigo for other app-to-app connections who want to add EDI without introducing a new vendor.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · EDI · direct prompt · alternative

“Celigo is worth considering; one vendor guide specifically mentions it for mid-sized businesses” Perplexity Sonar · EDI · paraphrase prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“Caveat: Basic EDI capabilities compared to dedicated EDI platforms” DeepSeek V4 Flash · EDI · direct prompt · soft negative

“Celigo is also mentioned as not knowing what they want to do with EDI.” Llama 4 Maverick · EDI · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Celigo Integrator.io, over the 48 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Celigo Integrator.io was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

TrueCommerce EDI42 of 488Not among the top eight

Cleo Integration Cloud40 of 4816Not among the top eight

Orderful30 of 484Not among the top eight

SPS Commerce28 of 488Not among the top eight

Jitterbit EDI8 of 481Not among the top eight

eZCom Software EDI7 of 482Not among the top eight

SPS Commerce Fulfillment EDI7 of 481Not among the top eight

OpenText Trading Grid6 of 480Not among the top eight

Elevate4 of 481Not among the top eight

Boomi B2B/EDI Management4 of 480Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Celigo Integrator.io. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 48 of the 48 answers that named Celigo Integrator.io and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

learn.g2.com37

cleo.com36

g2.com33

jitterbit.com32

orderful.com19

capterra.com17

softwareconnect.com17

softwareadvice.com14

sourceforge.net13

worldmetrics.org13

231 of the 231 domain citations in answers naming Celigo Integrator.io came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

learn.g2.com/best-edi-software37

jitterbit.com/blog/best-edi-platforms30

g2.com/categories/electronic-data-interchange-edi20

cleo.com/blog/best-edi-platform-mid-size-company18

softwareconnect.com/roundups/best-edi-software-providers17

cleo.com/blog/best-edi-solution-providers13

capterra.com/resources/best-edi-software-ease-of-use-smbs11

thectoclub.com/tools/best-edi-software11

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

celigo.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Celigo Integrator.io takes 0% of first choices and TrueCommerce EDI takes 32%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “edi platform”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “edi platforms”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 140 a month (“celigo integrator.io”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 0 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 9,670 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 2,721 · 127 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 3,008
Paid Google search: 3 searches its ads show for, about 42 clicks and $1,097 a month (estimate)

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

118+ ads · 77 image, 41 text · 43 shown in the last 30 days

First shown March 2025, as Celigo, Inc., verified. Ads started 2025-11 to 2026-10: 108 in the year, 10 before. 2 more by other advertisers linking to it.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 19 of 93 in EDI

Segment leader

32%

TrueCommerce EDI

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 48 answers
Its own site cited: in 48 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on celigo.com

2,243

subdomains included

Content

792

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

54 · 1,044

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Blog	450	36	2026-09-28	API management, ITSM
Case study	110	3	2026-09-03	ITSM
Report or ebook	86	5	2026-09-02
Webinar or virtual event	82	9	2026-09-24	API management, Data warehouses
Comparison	27	1	2026-07-15	ETL
Glossary or explainer	16	0	2026-06-26	API management
Conference or event	12	3	2026-09-01
News or press	6	2	2026-09-03
Template or tool	3	0	2026-01-08

Most recent

2026-09-28Celigo topics native publish subscribe without a separate broker blog
2026-09-28End user credentials for mcp tools blog
2026-09-25Ipaas tools integration specialists blog
2026-09-25Celigo managed file transfer mft hosted sftp blog
2026-09-24Celigo on celigo cfo insider with steve sutter webinar or virtual event
2026-09-24Data entry automation blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page celigo.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.

Names read as Celigo Integrator.io

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Celigo Integrator.io; a claim can dispute any of them.

Celigo 30

Follow Celigo Integrator.io

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

The company

Celigo Integrator.io is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: Celigo is an intelligent automation platform built to run enterprise automation under one governed system — from deterministic, rules-based workflows to AI agents.
celigo.com
For: enterprise automation
celigo.com
Free plan or trial: Start a 30-day free trial with full platform access celigo.com
Integrations claimed: 1000 celigo.com
Certifications: SOC 2 complianceCCPAGDPRSOC 2 Type 2SOC 1 Type 2ISO/IEC 27001ISO/IEC 42001:2023
Hosting: USEUAUCA
Customers named: TherabodyPeak DesignWalmartSalesforceMS Dynamics 365Oracle NetSuiteSAPAmazon
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price

What Celigo Integrator.io's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: celigo.com, trust.celigo.com, celigo.com/platform, celigo.com/customer-stories, celigo.com/partners. A claimed page can correct any of them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Celigo Integrator.io's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Celigo Integrator.io, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Celigo Integrator.io by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Celigo Integrator.io is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name Celigo Integrator.io, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.