Every category where a model named IBM InfoSphere 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
Master data management	Data platform	0%	92 of 92	68%	19	criticized challenger
Data quality and observability	Data platform	0%	90 of 110	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by Metaplane at 31%
Data catalogs and governance	Data platform	0%	72 of 83	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Atlan at 44%
Data masking and test data management	Data platform	0%	129 of 140	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by DATPROF at 17%
ETL and ELT	Data platform	0%	60 of 75	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Fivetran at 40%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	1	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	4	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.20	0	0	4	4
Mistral Small	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	3	0	3
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	5	5
Kimi K2	0	2	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	2	1	3

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

Direct5 labelsNone

Paraphrase10 labelsNone

Comparative12 labelsNone

Budget-constrained5 labelsNone

Scale-constrained13 labelsNone

Negative15 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative60 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“IBM noted for its data modeling and stewardship capabilities” Mistral Small · Master data · comparative 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.

“steer clear of massive enterprise legacy platforms (like SAP MDG, IBM InfoSphere, or Stibo Systems)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Master data · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

“IBM MDM ... reviews and analyst commentary often point to complexity, implementation effort, and services-heavy deployments as real risks” GPT-5.4 mini · Master data · negative prompt · soft negative

“"Big Enterprise" Solutions (e.g., Informatica IDMC, IBM): These are powerful but often overly complex for a 500-person team.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Master data · scale prompt · soft negative

“without the steep learning curve and infrastructure costs associated with enterprise giants like Delphix or IBM InfoSphere” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Data masking · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as IBM InfoSphere, over the 60 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IBM InfoSphere was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Informatica MDM34 of 604Not among the top eight

Semarchy xDM28 of 603Not among the top eight

Profisee MDM26 of 6012Not among the top eight

Pimcore20 of 606Not among the top eight

SAP Master Data Governance20 of 601Not among the top eight

Ataccama ONE19 of 601Not among the top eight

Reltio18 of 600Not among the top eight

Stibo Systems STEP14 of 600Not among the top eight

Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud13 of 600Not among the top eight

AtroCore MDM12 of 602Not 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 IBM InfoSphere. 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 52 of the 60 answers that named IBM InfoSphere and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

atrocore.com25

g2.com18

guideflow.com18

ovaledge.com18

profisee.com16

semarchy.com15

fanruan.com14

checkthat.ai12

ciopages.com12

gartner.com12

160 of the 160 domain citations in answers naming IBM InfoSphere came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

atrocore.com/en/blog/best-master-data-management-tools20

semarchy.com/blog/top-master-data-management-solutions-compared14

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/master-data-management11

guideflow.com/blog/master-data-management-software11

ovaledge.com/blog/master-data-management-tools11

bluestonex.com/knowledge-bank/master-data-management-software10

larksuite.com/en_us/blog/tools-for-master-data-management10

profisee.com/30-best-master-data-management-tools10

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where IBM InfoSphere stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 170 a month (“ibm infosphere”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 39 a month
Its own site: It sits on IBM's site (ibm.com), so there are no site figures for it alone

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 92 of 92 in master data

Segment leader

41%

Profisee MDM

First choices: 0 across its categories
Named in: 60 answers
Its own site cited: in 52 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.

Names read as IBM InfoSphere

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

IBM 11IBM InfoSphere / IBM OpenPages 1IBM InfoSphere / Master Data Management v10.x 1IBM InfoSphere / QualityStage 1IBM Infosphere 1

Follow IBM InfoSphere

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

IBM is the company behind IBM InfoSphere.

ShowHide

On record

Company records

Also from IBM: IBM AI Fairness 360, IBM API Connect, IBM Apptio Cloudability, IBM Aspera, IBM Aspera Managed File Transfer, IBM Business Automation Workflow, IBM Cloud Databases, IBM Cloud Kubernetes and 98 more

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: Investigate, cleanse and manage your data to increase the value of your information assets.
ibm.com/products/infosphere-qualitystage
For: organizations
ibm.com/products/infosphere-big-match-for-hadoop
Price stated: subscription pricing ibm.com/products/infosphere-qualitystage
Not stated on the pages read: Starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers

What IBM InfoSphere's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: ibm.com/products/infosphere-qualitystage, ibm.com/products/infosphere-data-architect, ibm.com/products/infosphere-identity-insight, ibm.com/products/infosphere-information-analyzer, ibm.com/products/infosphere-big-match-for-hadoop. 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 IBM InfoSphere'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 IBM InfoSphere, 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 IBM InfoSphere by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where IBM InfoSphere 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 IBM InfoSphere, 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.