Every category where a model named SharePoint 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
IT documentation	IT operations and endpoint	0%	92 of 92	56%	9	under 10 labels · led by Hudu at 17%
Enterprise architecture tools	IT operations and endpoint	0%	105 of 113	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by SAP LeanIX at 25%
Internal developer portals	Developer platform	0%	51 of 52	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Port at 53%

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	2	3
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	2	1	3
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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels1

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative17 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative30 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.

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.

“Generic Wiki-Based "Portals" (Avoid Completely) ... SharePoint site called "Developer Resources."” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Developer portals · negative prompt · hard negative

“The "Build-Your-Own" SharePoint/Excel/Power BI Trap ... avoid building a manual repository” Gemini 3.5 Flash · EA tools · negative prompt · hard negative

“Storing system passwords, API keys, or break-glass credentials in plain text inside SharePoint... is a severe security risk” Gemini 3.5 Flash · IT documentation · negative prompt · soft negative

“Avoid or proceed cautiously for: Internal knowledge bases, searchable IT runbooks, SOP repositories” Qwen 3.7 Flash · IT documentation · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SharePoint, over the 30 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SharePoint was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Confluence17 of 302Not among the top eight

Hudu11 of 306Not among the top eight

IT Glue11 of 301Not among the top eight

Notion11 of 300Not among the top eight

BookStack6 of 301Not among the top eight

Document3606 of 301Not among the top eight

Guru4 of 300Not among the top eight

IT Portal3 of 301Not among the top eight

Archer3 of 300Not among the top eight

Everbridge 3603 of 300Not 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 SharePoint. 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 27 of the 30 answers that named SharePoint and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

atlassian.com7

reddit.com7

docsie.io5

document360.com5

g2.com5

hudu.com5

itglue.com5

softwareadvice.com5

aimultiple.com4

em360tech.com4

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

Pages cited

aimultiple.com/it-documentation-software4

document360.com/blog/it-documentation-software4

ferndesk.com/blog/best-it-documentation-software4

atlassian.com/software/confluence/features3

em360tech.com/top-10/business-continuity-platforms3

fortiv.io/blog/best-business-continuity-software3

hudu.com/product/overview3

itglue.com/pricing3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

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

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 673,000 a month (“sharepoint”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 20,386 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 92 of 92 in IT documentation

Segment leader

17%

Hudu

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 30 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 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 SharePoint

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

SharePoint (Microsoft) 1

Follow SharePoint

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

where SharePoint 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 SharePoint, 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.