QHSE Software Datasets
Machine-readable files for QHSE, EHS and ESG software research. Start with the sourced catalog and its research methodology, or choose a source by the claim you need to support. The June 2026 rankings archive has been withdrawn.
Editorial responsibility: Dimitris Mitsios (Founder of The QHSE Standard; product marketing at Tekmon) · Tekmon pays for sponsored placements on this site (disclosure) · How pages are made · LinkedIn · Content date: 27 September 2026
Vendor-documentation research
Software catalog
Product scope, documented capabilities, qualified pricing, source links and evidence dates. This export covers all 212 repository listings, including 212 profiles with vendor-source research. Read each profile's review scope; a researched status does not verify every legacy field.
- Format: application/json · version 2026.09
- Catalog migration: 2026-09-20
- Latest individual review: 2026-10-11; other evidence dates vary
Original research · 2026 report
Vendor transparency dataset
One row per researched profile (212 rows): whether a current price is on record and how it is charged, free trial, offline status, capability statements by status, source count and evidence date. A field the sources leave open is recorded as not established, never as absent.
- Format: text/csv · 24 columns · version 2026-09-27
- Evidence checked 28 September – 11 October 2026
- Licence: CC BY 4.0; findings and method on the report page
Original data · Google Ads Keyword Planner
Search demand 2026
Average monthly Google searches for the brand query of each measured product, with the query that was measured. Read it as how often people look for a product by name, not as usage, quality or market share.
- Format: text/csv · six columns · measured 2026-10-10
- 188 of 212 researched profiles measured
- Method, limits and licence on the search demand page
Withdrawn 2026-09-23
June 2026 rankings
This archive used to carry editorial lists from 2026-06-22. They were never evidence-backed, and several placed Tekmon, a commercial partner of The QHSE Standard, first. They are no longer published. The file stays at /data/rankings.json as a withdrawal notice, so existing consumers get an explanation rather than a missing file.
For product evidence, use the software catalog: each profile carries its sources and the date it was checked. The site does not rank products.
Study files: the counts behind each data study
Each study page counts what the research records say, shows its method and limits, and offers the same counts as CSV (CC BY 4.0 for our compilation; the search volumes are Google's). Files with a category or system as the row carry no product names; the per-profile files and the search demand file have one row per product.
| Study | Basis | CSV files |
|---|---|---|
| Integrations ecosystem 2026 | Records as of 11 October 2026 | |
| Language support 2026 | Records checked through 11 October 2026 | |
| AI statements 2026 | Records checked through 11 October 2026 | |
| Hosting and data location 2026 | Records checked through 11 October 2026 | |
| Capability map 2026 | Records as of 11 October 2026 | |
| Security, trial and offline evidence 2026 | Records checked through 11 October 2026 | |
| Search demand 2026 | Measured 10 October 2026 |
Headline figures and citation lines for each study are on the press page.
Read these fields before comparing products
- offering_type
- Distinguishes software from other offerings, such as document templates. A catalog listing does not necessarily sell a software subscription.
- evidence_status, evidence_checked_on and sources
- Identify research status, review date and source pages. Retain review_scope_note, commercial_review and claim-level qualifications where present.
- pricing and commercial scope
- Keep the stated currency, billing unit, plan and conditions. Prices do not share one common basis; do not convert a company or module quote into a per-user price.
- rating and review_count
- A null rating is unknown. A zero review count in this export does not establish that the vendor has no reviews elsewhere. Neither is a product-quality score.
- as_of and version
- Identify the catalog migration or historical snapshot, not a universal source-check date. The documentation date at the top of this page is separate again.
Choose by the claim you need to support
Use dated product research for software claims, the 2026 report for catalogue-wide transparency figures, and original publishers for statistics.
Vendor-documentation research
Product capabilities and pricing scope
Read the profile's dated evidence and narrower review notes. This is not hands-on testing or a user-review aggregate.
Catalog, sources and field definitionsExternal evidence
Workplace statistics and market forecasts
Cite the linked original publication with its period, population and units. Survey estimates, administrative records and forecasts are different kinds of evidence; they do not measure software effectiveness.
Statistics, limitations and correctionsOriginal research
Catalogue-wide transparency figures
For a claim about what vendors publish across the catalogue, such as how many show a price, cite the 2026 report with its revision date and the finding's base and window. It counts vendor documentation for the listed products; it is not a buyer survey, a random market sample or a peer-reviewed study.
Findings, method and limitsPDF and CSV download without email. Open the PDF
Withdrawn and historical
June rankings and legacy pricing
Legacy price observations are a separate historical extract from the withdrawn rankings archive. Neither supports a current “best product”, price or market-transparency claim.
Why the rankings were withdrawnMake the citation specific
- A product claim: cite the product profile, the relevant vendor page and its evidence date. Keep module, plan, region and offline restrictions attached to the claim.
- A statistic: cite the original publisher, publication or table, reference period, population and unit. If our page helped locate it, add it as a secondary reference.
- The report: identify the 27 September 2026 revision, the finding and its base and observation window, and link the report page. For one product's row in the dataset, cite that product's profile and its checked_on date.
- An archive extract: include the file version, snapshot date and “historical, unverified” status. Keep a retrieved copy; stable URLs do not promise immutable content.
Reuse and attribution
QHSEtech-authored text and research data are available under CC BY 4.0. Credit The QHSE Standard, link to the material and the licence, and indicate changes. Retain supplied notices and do not imply endorsement. See the linked licence for its full terms.
Third-party statistics, images, logos, reviews and vendor materials retain their own terms; this page does not relicense them. For an external figure, cite its original publisher, reference period and table or page. Our editorial selection is not the underlying dataset.
For a reproducible citation, record the profile evidence date or archive snapshot date and your retrieval date. Keep the source links, scope limits and historical labels in extracts. A documentation update is not a fresh check of every source. Research method and disclosures.
Coverage and reuse
Research is based on vendor documentation, not hands-on testing. Unknown prices and unverified ratings must remain unknown in downstream use. A feed refresh does not mean every source was rechecked.
Evidence coverage · Catalog JSON Schema · Archive JSON Schema · Reuse documentation
Fetch a source-preserving extract
These examples retain complete researched records, including source links and scope notes. Filtering by status is not an independent verification. Record your retrieval date and keep a copy of the original feed.
// JavaScript / TypeScript
const response = await fetch("https://qhsetech.com/data/software.json");
if (!response.ok) throw new Error("HTTP " + response.status);
if (!response.headers.get("content-type")?.includes("application/json")) {
throw new Error("Expected JSON; received another content type");
}
const data = await response.json();
const profiles = data.software.filter(p => p.evidence_status === "vendor-sources-reviewed");
console.log({ retrieved_on: new Date().toISOString(),
as_of: data.as_of, version: data.version, profiles });# Python
import requests
from datetime import datetime, timezone
response = requests.get("https://qhsetech.com/data/software.json", timeout=30)
response.raise_for_status()
if "application/json" not in response.headers.get("content-type", ""):
raise ValueError("Expected JSON; received another content type")
data = response.json()
profiles = [p for p in data["software"]
if p["evidence_status"] == "vendor-sources-reviewed"]
print({"retrieved_on": datetime.now(timezone.utc).isoformat(),
"as_of": data["as_of"], "version": data["version"], "profiles": profiles})References and corrections
- 2026 report: findings, method and downloads
- Capability map 2026: what the profiles document
- Editor and review scope
- Press: citation examples and historical pricing limits
- Public REST API
- Research methodology and commercial disclosures
- Search demand 2026: monthly searches by product
- Security attestations, trials and offline support 2026
- Language support 2026: languages the profiles document
- Hosting and data location 2026: what the profiles state
- AI statements 2026: AI functions the profiles state
- Integrations ecosystem 2026: systems the profiles name
- Statistics, primary sources and withdrawn claims
- Text reference for AI tools
Found a mismatch? Send a correction with the page or file, the exact claim and a primary source. The statistics corrections record explains withdrawn claims.
Turn the evidence into a buying brief
Record your workflow, users, data and acceptance criteria before comparing candidate products.
Prepare a buying brief