The full set, in one place: how the platform works, what it costs, how your data is handled, and what changes for each market.
What the engine does, where the evidence comes from, and how assessments are anchored to it.
No. Assessments rest on independent third-party evidence, and each one names the evidence it rests on. Test reports and trial results you upload are held privately to your tenant. Product behavior on a bench is a question for your own validation.
Documented records alone: the filings regulators require, funding announcements, and leadership changes on the documented record. Private financial data has no way into the pipeline, and we treat rumor as noise.
The library refreshes on a platform-managed cadence as the market moves, and every assessment carries the date it was last refreshed. Treat each one as a dated snapshot of the documented record.
Yes, and that is most of the point. What a capability means is settled once and then applied to every vendor and every evaluation in the same form. A panel of people doing this by hand drifts between reviewers and between weeks, and nothing in the output shows that it drifted.
By opening it. Every score carries what it was based on and the date it was last checked, so a number you doubt is one you can inspect rather than take on trust.
No. OmniAxis does the research and grades what vendors claim against independent evidence. The decision is your team's.
Review platforms aggregate user opinion. Analyst houses publish authoritative research on a periodic cycle. Generic AI tools answer without graded sources. OmniAxis does a narrower job with more discipline: it grades each capability claim on the evidence behind it, sets that beside what the marketing asserts, calibrates to the true peer group, and keeps provenance on every data point.
Because a published method is a method a vendor can game, and a graded library that can be gamed is worth nothing to the buyer relying on it. What we do publish is the basis of every individual score: the evidence behind a claim, its source, and its date, all inspectable in your own account.
You start with research already done rather than a blank slate, so there is no cold start. Anything you add on top (tracked vendors, private uploads, your own edits) stays private to your tenant.
No, and none are presented as such. Every figure carries an evidence-class label: illustrative, modeled, value hypothesis or measurement target. No verified customer outcomes exist yet; when they do, they will be labeled as measured results and nothing will be promoted early.
Using your tenant intelligence inside the AI client your team already runs. Live, tenant-scoped, and bounded by your own role and plan.
The Model Context Protocol is how an AI agent calls an outside system. The OmniAxis MCP connection lets the assistant your team already runs query your tenant's evidence-graded intelligence directly, so a vendor's graded profile comes back sourced and tiered inside your agent instead of you opening the Hub or the Evaluation portal.
Teams who would rather work in the AI client they already use, Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-capable assistant, than switch into a separate portal. You bring your own agent and OmniAxis provides tools scoped to your tenant, so it works with your role and plan just as you would in the portal.
Yes. There is no OmniAxis-hosted chat in this mode. You point your own MCP client at the OmniAxis endpoint and authenticate with a per-tenant key. Your agent and your tokens do the reasoning; OmniAxis runs the action and returns the evidence with its source attached.
It works with the intelligence you already hold. It reads your tracked vendors, their graded capability profiles with the evidence behind each claim, financial-viability signals, and the sources; makes the changes your role allows, such as tracking a vendor or updating your own record; and triggers the analytics your plan includes. Access is bounded to your tenant, to your subscription, and to your own role, so it acts as you and can never reach data or actions you could not use in the portal. The shared vendor library stays read-only over the connection.
It is part of every Vendor Portal plan, the Buyer Portal's Enterprise plan and the Advisory Portal's Enterprise plan. On other plans the key settings are not shown, and the connection refuses a key.
You generate a per-tenant key from your workspace, shown once like a personal access token, and you can label, rotate, or revoke it at any time. Revoking a key ends access immediately, and every call re-enters your tenant's permission and subscription checks.
How the plans are priced, what separates them, and how getting started works.
Pricing is provided on application. Each portal has its own three plans. Buyer plans differ by how many evaluations you run at once, team seats, and whether market intelligence, the AI tools, total cost of ownership comparison and the MCP connection are included. Advisory plans differ by concurrent engagements, new evaluations a month, seats and client stakeholders, with firm branding and AI higher up. Vendor plans differ by how often your tracked competitors are refreshed, how many you track, and the AI Workspace. Tell us which side of the table you sit on and we will send the figures.
Because a published price list is one a competitor prices against, and at this stage that costs us more than the friction it saves you. It is a short conversation, not a negotiation tactic, and the numbers do not change based on who is asking.
The MVP launches in November 2026. Until general availability in January 2027 it is open only to registered early customers, invited in order of fit from the registrations we review. From January 2027 any organization can subscribe. Registering now is how you get a place before then.
Yes. Every engagement starts with a working session under NDA on your own shortlist, so you see the record take shape before any commitment. Book one from the working-session page.
Less than you would expect, because there is no cold start. You start with research already done rather than a blank slate. You choose the vendors or competitors to track, confirm your own company profile, and work from there.
The analysis is already being done: by hand, per shortlist, and discarded once the contract is signed. The saving is in doing it once. The same work serves the evaluation in front of you, the review that follows it, and the next decision your team makes in that market, so nobody is rebuilding a spreadsheet to answer a question the team answered last quarter. We publish no figure for it. The honest one is yours rather than ours, and an invented one would be worth nothing to you.
How we isolate your data, how we govern access, and how we describe our own posture.
Every tenant operates in a private space. Your tracked vendors, uploads, annotations, and evaluation work are invisible to other tenants.
They stay private to your organization, and only your own team can see them.
From the independent documented record rather than from vendor marketing. We keep the source catalog private by design, because a published list is one a vendor can work backwards from. The source behind any single claim is visible to you at the point that claim is made. Documentation you upload is held privately to your tenant.
No. Financial-viability signals derive from documented records only.
No. OmniAxis does not claim a certified SOC 2; certification is an open decision. The trust overview we share on request records the current status.
Yes. Processing is GDPR-aligned, and a Data Processing Agreement, including sub-processor detail, is available on request.
They are checked against the independent record, like every other claim a vendor makes.
It produces the artifacts that process already asks for: criteria you define and weight, a scored comparison across the shortlist, and a decision record capturing the selection and its rationale. The difference is that every score links to the evidence behind it.
You do. The rating against your criteria is your committee's, and so is the decision.
Yes. RFP responses, trial results and vendor documentation stay private to your organization.
It stays isolated to your tenant. Your shortlist, your scores, and your rationale are visible only to your own team.
Yes. The advisory side of the platform holds your clients, your engagements and your own templates, and it reads the same evidence library the buying team's product reads. You are not rebuilding the research for each client, and you are not asking them to take your recall on trust.
Yes. Reports and exports are built for that, IP-marked and permission-gated section by section so what leaves the platform is deliberate. A client-facing review carries the evidence and its source, which is what makes it hold up in the room.
The record: the criteria, what each vendor was judged on, and the reasoning behind the recommendation. Advice that leaves with the consultant is advice the client cannot defend six months later when somebody asks why this supplier.
No. You subscribe once and run your engagements inside your own practice, each client kept separate from the others.
You choose them. The library is already profiled, so you select the vendors you actually compete against rather than accepting a segment someone else drew. Scoring is then calibrated within that peer group, because a specialist measured against a hyperscaler can only lose.
That is precisely the case the product is built for. A vendor's marketing position and what the independent record supports are both reported, so a weak spot is visible rather than averaged away, and it becomes the question your sales team puts in front of a prospect.
No. Your tracked list, your uploads and your annotations are private to your organization, and a vendor we profile cannot see who tracks it.
Bring it to a working session and walk us through it. You can also upload documentation of your own, and it stays private to your organization.
Ask us directly. A working session on your own shortlist answers the questions a FAQ cannot, and registration for the November 2026 MVP is open now.