Index › Products › LlamaParse · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

LlamaParse

9Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

8 / 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

7 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. LlamaParse was named 7 times in Document processing, where Nanonets led with 32%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business33 of 96

under the label threshold

Mid-market18 of 89

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In document processing · 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 LlamaParse 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
Intelligent document processing	Data platform	0%	18 of 89	0%	7	under 10 labels · led by Nanonets at 32%

Movement

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

ShowHide

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 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.

“Choose LlamaParse or similar AI-native parsers if your goal is to feed documents into a generative AI tool” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Document processing · comparative prompt · alternative

“LlamaParse and the major cloud APIs (Google, Amazon, Azure) are the right fit for AI/ML teams” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Document processing · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for AI-native document apps: LlamaParse/LlamaIndex tools” Perplexity Sonar · Document processing · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LlamaParse, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LlamaParse was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

ABBYY Vantage9 of 92Not among the top eight

UiPath Document Understanding8 of 91Not among the top eight

Amazon Textract8 of 90Not among the top eight

Hyperscience Hypercell8 of 90Not among the top eight

Rossum6 of 91Not among the top eight

Azure AI Document Intelligence6 of 90Not among the top eight

Docsumo5 of 91Not among the top eight

Google Document AI4 of 90Not among the top eight

Nanonets3 of 91Not among the top eight

Automation Anywhere3 of 90Not 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 LlamaParse. 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 9 of the 9 answers that named LlamaParse and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

llamaindex.ai9

docsumo.com8

dev.to5

flowwright.com5

research.isg-one.com5

guideflow.com4

avasant.com3

ciopages.com3

doxis.com3

extend.ai3

No domain is on file for LlamaParse, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

docsumo.com/blog/the-best-intelligent-document-processing-software8

llamaindex.ai/insights/best-idp-tools8

dev.to/derek-compdf/top-intelligent-document-processing-software-for-2024-3j7p5

flowwright.com/blog/8-best-intelligent-document-processing-software5

research.isg-one.com/buyers-guide/digital_technology/intelligent_document_processing/20245

avasant.com/report/intelligent-document-processing-platforms-2024-2025-radarview3

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/intelligent-document-processing3

doxis.com/en/blog/best-idp-software3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as LlamaParse

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

LlamaParse/LlamaIndex-based document tools 1

Follow LlamaParse

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.

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 LlamaParse'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 LlamaParse, 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 LlamaParse by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where LlamaParse 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 LlamaParse, 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.