| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDI platforms | Data platform | 0% | 90 of 93 | 67% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by TrueCommerce EDI at 32% | |
| Managed file transfer | Data platform | 0% | 46 of 97 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Files.com at 43% |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“long-standing enterprise-grade EDI/B2B platform, especially in larger organizations with complex partner ecosystems” GPT-5.4 mini · EDI · comparative prompt · alternative
“Consider instead (good security track record)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · MFT · negative prompt · alternative
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.
“comes with significant caveats that make it a poor fit for organizations looking for agility” Qwen 3.7 Flash · EDI · negative prompt · soft negative
“they require highly specialized, expensive EDI consultants to configure and maintain” Gemini 3.5 Flash · EDI · comparative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 36 of the 37 answers that named IBM Sterling B2B Integrator and are not a share of its labels.
160 of the 160 domain citations in answers naming IBM Sterling B2B Integrator came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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.
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.
What IBM Sterling B2B Integrator's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: ibm.com/products/sterling, ibm.com/products/b2b-integrator, ibm.com/case-studies/sterling-oms-instana, ibm.com/case-studies/sterling-tech-client-quote, ibm.com/case-studies/dhl-international-watson-sterling. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Sterling B2B Integrator'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 Sterling B2B Integrator, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for IBM Sterling B2B Integrator by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: