Every category where a model named ProsperOps 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
Cloud cost management	Cloud and infrastructure	0%	17 of 79	10%	21	accepted challenger

Movement

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

By model

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

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

Direct14 labelsNone

Paraphrase7 labels1

Comparative13 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained8 labelsNone

Negative9 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative52 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.

“ProsperOps / nOps: These tools run on autopilot to manage your AWS Savings Plans and Reserved Instances.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · FinOps · scale prompt · alternative

“You want a hands-off, AI-driven optimizer that continuously manages commitments and spot instances” GLM 4.7 FlashX · FinOps · comparative prompt · alternative

“ProsperOps acts as an automated portfolio manager for your AWS compute commitments.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · FinOps · direct prompt · alternative

“Strongest for autonomous rate/commitment optimization with minimal manual effort.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · FinOps · 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.

“skip pure optimizers like CAST AI/ProsperOps unless K8s/commitments are 80% of spend” Grok 4.1 Fast · FinOps · scale prompt · soft negative

“ProsperOps acquired by Flexera (January 2026) ... long-term roadmap uncertainty” Kimi K2 · FinOps · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as ProsperOps, over the 52 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ProsperOps was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CloudZero40 of 528Not in the top three

Vantage37 of 5217Not in the top three

IBM Apptio Cloudability36 of 524Not in the top three

Kubecost29 of 520Not in the top three

CAST AI25 of 520Not in the top three

VMware Tanzu CloudHealth25 of 520Not in the top three

AWS Cost Explorer21 of 526Not in the top three

Finout20 of 523Not in the top three

Microsoft Cost Management20 of 523Not in the top three

Infracost18 of 520Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 ProsperOps. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 41 of the 52 answers that named ProsperOps and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cloudzero.com33

cloudaware.com30

gartner.com23

usage.ai20

amnic.com17

learn.g2.com16

vantage.sh13

nops.io12

pointfive.co12

finout.io11

187 of the 187 domain citations in answers naming ProsperOps came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cloudzero.com/blog/cloud-cost-management-tools28

gartner.com/reviews/market/cloud-financial-management-tools23

cloudaware.com/blog/cloud-cost-management-tools22

usage.ai/blogs/finops/tools/best-tools20

learn.g2.com/best-cloud-cost-management-software16

nops.io/blog/cloud-cost-management-software-tools12

amnic.com/blogs/cloud-cost-management-tools10

newrelic.com/blog/observability/best-cloud-cost-management-tools9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as ProsperOps

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

ProsperOps (a Flexera company) 1ProsperOps / Zesty 1nOps/ProsperOps 1

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 ProsperOps'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 ProsperOps, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at prosperops.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.