IT AI Index

Index › Products › Decisions · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Decisions

2Judge labels

1First choices

1Negative labels

2 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Decisions was named 1 time in Process mining, where Apromore led with 19%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market17 of 61

under the label threshold

Enterprise42 of 50

under the label threshold

In process mining · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Decisions 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
Process mining	IT operations and endpoint	2%	17 of 61	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Apromore at 19%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Decisions 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 Decisions across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

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

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

Direct1 label1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.

“ProcessMaker and Decisions are the two vendors explicitly marketed for mid-market in 2026” Muse Glimmer 30B · Process mining · direct prompt · first choice

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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Decisions, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Decisions was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Celonis Process Intelligence Platform2 of 20Not among the top eight

IBM Process Mining2 of 20Not among the top eight

UiPath Process Mining2 of 20Not among the top eight

ABBYY Timeline1 of 20Not among the top eight

ARIS1 of 20Not among the top eight

Apromore1 of 20Not among the top eight

MEHRWERK1 of 20Not among the top eight

Microsoft Power Automate Process Mining1 of 20Not among the top eight

Microsoft Process Mining1 of 20Not among the top eight

Noxus1 of 20Not 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 Decisions. 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 2 of the 2 answers that named Decisions and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com2

bardeen.ai1

ciopages.com1

decisions.comYour site1

documentation.decisions.comYour site1

erpresearch.com1

gartner.com1

guideflow.com1

mybusinessfuture.com1

noxus.ai1

Nine of the eleven domain citations in answers naming Decisions came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

bardeen.ai/best/process-intelligence-software1

bardeen.ai/best/process-mining-tools1

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/process-mining1

decisions.com/datasheets/decisions-process-mining1

decisions.com/mid-market-pricing1

decisions.com/platform/process-intelligence1

documentation.decisions.com/process-mining/docs/introduction-to-process-mining1

erpresearch.com/erp-add-ons/process-mining1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

decisions.com ranks first on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Decisions takes 2% of first choices and Apromore takes 19%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “process mining tool”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “process mining tools”

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 17 of 61 in process mining

Segment leader

19%

Apromore

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 2 answers
Its own site cited: in 2 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 decisions.com

2,050

subdomains included

Content

1,938

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

34 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Blog	1,149	12	2026-10-02	Process mining, RPA
Webinar or virtual event	218	5	2026-10-29	Process mining, ETL
Conference or event	209	2	2026-09-17	Process mining
Report or ebook	143	2	2026-09-22	Process mining
Case study	74	1	2026-07-22
Template or tool	64	undated
Glossary or explainer	42	0	2025-02-07	Master data, Process mining
Comparison	38	0	2024-10-10	Process mining, RPA
Podcast or video	1	0	2018-11-16

Most recent

2026-10-29Quarterly product release review webinar or virtual event
2026-10-235 things an ai agent should never decide alone webinar or virtual event
2026-10-02The integration tax your budget never shows blog
2026-09-23Universal orchestration the foundation for the next era of enterprise automation blog
2026-09-22The universal orchestration roi playbook report or ebook
2026-09-17Submerse virtual training october 2026 conference or event

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page decisions.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 October 5, 2026.

Follow Decisions

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

Decisions is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: AI and Process Automation Platform
decisions.com
For: the enterprise
decisions.com
Free plan or trial: Free Trial decisions.com
Customers named: Lockheed MartinMidFirst BankPantheonCity of Miami Parking AuthorityMediacomGeorgia Southern UniversityVantage Health TechnologiesStetson University
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price, integrations, certifications, hosting

What Decisions's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: decisions.com, decisions.com/platform-overview, decisions.com/case-studies, decisions.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 Decisions'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 Decisions, 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 Decisions by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Decisions 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 Decisions, 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.