QuadrantX Market Intelligence

Enterprise Resource Planning
Report Q1 2026

How Leading LLMs Currently Interpret the Enterprise Resource Planning Market

View Rankings
21
Vendors Analyzed
5
LLM Models
15
Analysis Runs
5
Leaders Identified

QuadrantX Positioning

Vendor placement based on Narrative Dominance and Sentiment scores across LLM analyses

Leaders
Challengers
Niche Players
Laggards

Complete Vendor Rankings

All 21 vendors ranked by combined Narrative Dominance and Sentiment scores

#1

SAP

Leader
ND 100
Sentiment 95
#2

Oracle

a.k.a. Oracle NetSuite
Leader
ND 97
Sentiment 86
#3

NetSuite (Oracle)

a.k.a. NetSuite
Leader
ND 88
Sentiment 80
#4

Microsoft Dynamics 365

a.k.a. Microsoft
Leader
ND 91
Sentiment 76
#5

Workday

Leader
ND 80
Sentiment 63
#6

Infor

Challenger
ND 78
Sentiment 56
#7

IFS

Challenger
ND 61
Sentiment 53
#8

Sage Intacct

Challenger
ND 64
Sentiment 47
#9

Epicor

Challenger
ND 61
Sentiment 45
#10

Sage

Challenger
ND 64
Sentiment 41
#11

Acumatica

Laggard
ND 48
Sentiment 48
#12

Unit4

Laggard
ND 41
Sentiment 39
#13

Plex

a.k.a. Plex (by Rockwell Automation)
Laggard
ND 34
Sentiment 44
#14

Deltek

Laggard
ND 30
Sentiment 44
#15

Plex Systems (Rockwell Automation)

a.k.a. Plex Systems (now Rockwell Automation)
Laggard
ND 29
Sentiment 42
#16

Odoo

Laggard
ND 39
Sentiment 32
#17

SYSPRO

Laggard
ND 32
Sentiment 35
#18

QAD

Laggard
ND 32
Sentiment 28
#19

Aptean

Laggard
ND 25
Sentiment 30
#20
ND 15
Sentiment 37
#21

Rootstock

Laggard
ND 18
Sentiment 25

Key Findings

Critical insights extracted from cross-model analysis

Innovation Concentration

Modern, cloud-native platforms show concentrated sentiment advantages at multiple touchpoints.

Narrative Visibility Gaps

A narrow top-funnel ND range indicates crowded awareness conditions. 9 vendors show limited visibility despite market presence.

Sentiment Cliffs

Certain platforms exhibit notable drops between mid- and bottom-funnel stages, reflecting evaluation-stage friction.

Feature-Set Separators

ERP-integrated suites gain advantage through ecosystem lock-in, while modern competitors differentiate through UX and automation.

๐Ÿ“Š Market Movement Analysis

Comparing this report to a previous analysis from 27 days ago

Previous Report: 3337510b... (Q4_2025)

๐Ÿ“ˆ
MOST IMPROVED
Odoo

Showed the biggest improvement since last report. ND changed by +17, Sentiment by +7 over 27 days.

๐Ÿ† Category Awards

Recognizing standout vendors based on AI-consensus analysis

๐Ÿ†
Most Valuable
SAP
Score: 195

Achieved the highest combined performance with ND 100 and Sentiment 95, establishing clear market leadership.

๐Ÿš€
Most Potential
SAP
Sentiment: 95

Identified by our AI analyst as showing strong growth momentum. Monitor SAP's ability to accelerate customer cloud migrations while maintaining innovation investment in emerging technologies like AI and automation.

โšก
Most Controversial
Acumatica
Variance: 141

Generated the most debate across AI models with a variance score of 141. Models showed significant disagreement on this vendor's positioning.

QuadrantX Methodology

QuadrantX applies a structured, multi-model approach using 15 independent runs across 5 LLMs (claude, openai, gemini, perplexity, deepseek). Each model is queried with deterministic temperature settings (0.1) to ensure reproducibility. Narrative Dominance (ND) measures how prominently vendors appear in AI-generated market discussions, while Sentiment captures overall perception quality. Scores are normalized through consensus scoring with variance tracking and outlier suppression. This snapshot enables objective, repeatable comparison across editions.

Transparency & Reproducibility

Complete audit trail: report identifiers, LLM configurations, and exact prompts used

๐Ÿ” Report Metadata & Archive References

Click to expand
Report ID:
c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f
Archive File Pattern:
c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f_[model]_[run].json
Generated: January 03, 2026 (UTC)
Total LLM Runs: 15

๐Ÿค– LLM Model Configurations โ€” 5 models used

Click to expand
CLAUDE
Provider: anthropic
Model: claude-sonnet-4-20250514
Temperature: 0.1
Max Tokens: 8192
Runs: 3
Archive: c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f_claude_*.json
OPENAI
Provider: openai
Model: gpt-4o
Temperature: 0.1
Max Tokens: 8192
Runs: 3
Archive: c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f_openai_*.json
GEMINI
Provider: google
Model: gemini-2.0-flash
Temperature: 0.1
Max Tokens: 8192
Runs: 3
Archive: c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f_gemini_*.json
PERPLEXITY
Provider: perplexity
Model: sonar-pro
Temperature: 0.1
Max Tokens: 8192
Runs: 3
Archive: c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f_perplexity_*.json
DEEPSEEK
Provider: deepseek
Model: deepseek-chat
Temperature: 0.1
Max Tokens: 8192
Runs: 3
Archive: c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f_deepseek_*.json

๐Ÿง  AI Analyst Enhancement โ€” Professional content synthesis

Click to expand
โœจ Analyst Model: CLAUDE

This report includes AI-enhanced analyst content. After gathering raw data from all LLM models, an additional AI call synthesizes the findings into professional narratives, vendor spotlights, strategic insights, and market predictions.

Vendor Spotlights: 3
Strategic Insights: 4
Market Predictions: 3
Archive: c734b792-5b88-4293-911e-8938aa7f391f_claude_0.json
Prompt Template: report_analyst.yaml
The analyst prompt ingests all vendor positions, scores, and initial findings to generate comprehensive professional content for the full PDF report.

๐Ÿ“ Category Analysis Prompt Template

Click to expand
# Market Category Analysis Request

## Category: Enterprise Resource Planning

The Enterprise Resource Planning market in Q1 2026 exhibits clear tier separation, with five vendors achieving Leader status while the remaining field struggles with visibility and sentiment challenges. The top tier demonstrates narrative dominance scores ranging from 80.4 to 100.0, creating a substantial gap from the challenger segment where scores drop to the 60-78 range. This stratification reflects successful cloud transformation initiatives among leaders and the increasing importance of ecosystem integration capabilities.

Market dynamics reveal concerning sentiment patterns across all tiers, with even leaders experiencing notable drops between technical capability recognition and buyer satisfaction. Microsoft Dynamics 365's 15.9-point sentiment gap exemplifies evaluation-stage friction that affects multiple vendors, suggesting systematic challenges in translating technical capabilities into positive buyer experiences.

Please provide a comprehensive analysis of the **Enterprise Resource Planning** market. 

**Important**: Analyze this category based on what it actually represents. This could be:
- A software/technology market (if the category name suggests software, platforms, or technology)
- A services market (consulting, banking, healthcare, etc.)
- A product market (consumer goods, industrial products, etc.)
- An institutional market (banks, universities, hospitals, etc.)
- Any other market type that the category name implies

Let the category name and description guide your interpretation. Do NOT assume this is a software market unless the category explicitly indicates software or technology.

Structure your response as JSON with the following sections:

### Required JSON Structure:

```json
{{{{
  "market_overview": {{{{
    "market_type": "Software|Services|Products|Institutions|Hybrid|Other",
    "summary": "2-3 paragraph overview of the current market state",
    "market_size_estimate": "Estimated market size if known",
    "growth_trajectory": "Growth trends and projections",
    "key_drivers": ["List of key market drivers"],
    "key_challenges": ["List of key challenges"],
    "geographic_context": "Geographic focus if applicable (e.g., Canada, Global, US)"
  }}}},
  "vendors": [
    {{{{
      "name": "Vendor/Company/Institution Name",
      "position": "Leader|Challenger|Niche Player|Emerging",
      "recommendation_score": 8.5,
      "strengths": ["Strength 1", "Strength 2"],
      "weaknesses": ["Weakness 1", "Weakness 2"],
      "best_for": ["Use case 1", "Customer segment 1"],
      "notable_attributes": ["Key differentiator 1", "Key differentiator 2"],
      "market_segment": "Enterprise|Consumer|SMB|Premium|Mass Market|All",
      "summary": "Brief 1-2 sentence description"
    }}}}
  ],
  "competitive_analysis": {{{{
    "must_have_attributes": ["Essential attributes all players should have"],
    "differentiators": ["What separates leaders from others"],
    "emerging_trends": ["New capabilities or offerings gaining traction"],
    "baseline_expectations": ["Basic offerings expected by all customers"]
  }}}},
  "customer_guidance": {{{{
    "evaluation_criteria": ["Key factors to consider when choosing"],
    "common_pitfalls": ["Mistakes to avoid"],
    "by_segment": {{{{
      "enterprise_institutional": "Guidance for large organizations",
      "mid_market": "Guidance for mid-sized organizations or customers",
      "consumer_smb": "Guidance for consumers or small businesses"
    }}}}
  }}}},
  "trends": {{{{
    "rising": ["Trends gaining momentum"],
    "declining": ["Trends losing relevance"],
    "emerging": ["New trends to watch"]
  }}}}
}}}}
```

### Analysis Guidelines:

1. **Market Interpretation**: First determine what type of market this is based on the category name. For example:
   - "Retail Banking in Canada" = Financial services/institutions market
   - "Customer Data Platforms" = Software/technology market
   - "Corporate Gifting" = Products/services market
   - "Expense Management Software" = Software market
   - "Luxury Hotels in Europe" = Services/hospitality market

2. **Player Coverage**: Include at least 10-15 relevant players (vendors, companies, institutions, brands) if the category has that many significant participants. Prioritize by market presence and relevance.

3. **Objectivity**: Provide balanced assessments. Every player has strengths AND weaknesses - include both.

4. **Specificity**: Be specific about offerings, use cases, and recommendations. Avoid generic statements.

5. **Recommendation Scores**: Use a 1-10 scale where:
   - 9-10: Clear leader, recommended for most use cases
   - 7-8: Strong option for specific use cases
   - 5-6: Viable but with notable limitations
   - 3-4: Limited applicability
   - 1-2: Not recommended for most customers

6. **Position Definitions**:
   - **Leader**: High market presence + broadly recommended + strong reputation
   - **Challenger**: High visibility but specific concerns, limitations, or emerging status
   - **Niche Player**: Strong in specific segments but limited broader appeal
   - **Emerging**: Newer entrants or players showing growth potential

7. **Context Sensitivity**: If the category has a geographic focus (e.g., "in Canada", "in Europe"), ensure your analysis reflects that specific market context.

8. **No fabrication / domains**: Do NOT invent vendors or website domains. If a website/domain is unknown, omit it or set it to null/""; prefer well-known, real vendors only.



Please provide your analysis in valid JSON format only, without any markdown code fences or additional text.