Index › Vendors › SAS · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

SAS

4Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

4 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, 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. SAS was named 1 time in ML platforms, where Azure Machine Learning led with 17%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business107 of 124

under the label threshold

Mid-market72 of 99

under the label threshold

Enterprise59 of 75

under the label threshold

In ml platforms · 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 SAS 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
ML platforms	Data platform	0%	72 of 99	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Azure Machine Learning at 17%

Movement

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

Model	Mention	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	1	1
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

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 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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 SAS, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SAS was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Azure Machine Learning4 of 41Not in the top three

Google Vertex AI4 of 41Not in the top three

Databricks3 of 42Not in the top three

Amazon SageMaker3 of 41Not in the top three

Alteryx2 of 40Not in the top three

C3 AI2 of 40Not in the top three

DataRobot2 of 40Not in the top three

Dataiku2 of 40Not in the top three

Kubeflow2 of 40Not in the top three

Palantir2 of 40Not 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 SAS. 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 3 of the 4 answers that named SAS and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com2

gartner.com2

learn.g2.com2

research.oz.spotlightar.com2

aiadvisorypractice.com1

aistrategy.guide1

arxiv.org1

aws.amazon.com1

azumo.com1

azure.microsoft.com1

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

Pages cited

learn.g2.com/best-data-science-ml-platforms2

research.oz.spotlightar.com/reports/forrester-wave-ai-ml-platforms-q3-2024/leaders2

aiadvisorypractice.com/blog/mlops-platform-comparison-enterprise-buyers1

aistrategy.guide/capabilities/ml-platforms1

arxiv.org/pdf/2110.029321

arxiv.org/pdf/2509.163521

aws.amazon.com/blogs/machine-learning/aws-recognized-as-a-first-time-leader-in-the-2024-ga1

azumo.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-insights/mlops-platform-comparison-20261

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 SAS'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 SAS, 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 the vendor's own domain 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.