Index › Products › TIBCO EBX · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

TIBCO EBX

18Judge labels

0First choices

5Negative labels

9 / 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

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. TIBCO EBX was named 8 times in Master data, where Profisee MDM led with 41%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business77 of 101

under the label threshold

Mid-market14 of 92

under the label threshold

Enterprise70 of 83

under the label threshold

In master data · 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 TIBCO EBX 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
Master data management	Data platform	0%	14 of 92	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by Profisee MDM at 41%

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	2	0	2

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

Comparative12 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative18 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.

“For complex, legacy‑centric hybrid environments: Talend (Qlik Talend Cloud), IBM InfoSphere MDM, TIBCO EBX.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Master data · comparative prompt · alternative

“Frequently appears in top cloud and overall MDM rankings.” Perplexity Sonar · Master data · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for: Reference data and metadata management” Kimi K2 · Master data · 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.

“Smaller vendor footprint; limited community resources and third‑party integrations” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Master data · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as TIBCO EBX, over the 18 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and TIBCO EBX was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Informatica MDM17 of 187Not among the top eight

Profisee MDM15 of 185Not among the top eight

Semarchy xDM15 of 180Not among the top eight

SAP Master Data Governance14 of 180Not among the top eight

Reltio11 of 181Not among the top eight

IBM InfoSphere MDM10 of 180Not among the top eight

Ataccama ONE9 of 180Not among the top eight

Stibo Systems STEP7 of 180Not among the top eight

IBM InfoSphere4 of 180Not among the top eight

Microsoft Master Data Services4 of 180Not 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 TIBCO EBX. 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 18 of the 18 answers that named TIBCO EBX and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

semarchy.com15

fanruan.com12

profisee.com12

atrocore.com8

guideflow.com8

larksuite.com8

ovaledge.com8

peerspot.com8

fortegrp.com7

gartner.com7

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

Pages cited

semarchy.com/blog/top-master-data-management-solutions-compared15

fanruan.com/en/blog/master-data-management-solutions-importance-business-success10

profisee.com/30-best-master-data-management-tools10

guideflow.com/blog/master-data-management-software8

ovaledge.com/blog/master-data-management-tools8

fortegrp.com/insights/top-19-data-management-tools-platforms-in-the-usa7

gartner.com/reviews/market/master-data-management-solutions7

larksuite.com/en_us/blog/tools-for-master-data-management7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

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

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 110 a month (“tibco ebx”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 4 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 14 of 92 in master data

Segment leader

41%

Profisee MDM

First choices: 0 across its categories
Named in: 18 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

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.

Follow TIBCO EBX

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

where TIBCO EBX 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 TIBCO EBX, 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.