Microsegmentation · October 2026 Edition
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Faddom
One of fourteen models named Akamai Guardicore Segmentation first on the direct prompt; zero named Faddom. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Faddom by nine and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation carries 51 labels and Faddom 11, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share12%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate20%9%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#4A position in a field of 9; printed, not drawn.
Labels5111A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.ColorTokens Xshield was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. ColorTokens Xshield vs Akamai Guardicore Segmentation · ColorTokens Xshield vs Faddom · Illumio Segmentation vs Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the microsegmentation page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Akamai Guardicore SegmentationFirst choices, of fourteen modelsFaddom
Direct101 against Faddom
Paraphrase501 against Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Comparative30
Budget-constrained035 against Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Scale-constrained10
Negative004 against Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Faddom were named in the same answer fourteen times, of the 149 answers naming Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and the 39 naming Faddom. In those answers Faddom took the first choice four times and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation one.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Faddom stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | ||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | | ||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | |||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | ||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | | |
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Faddom first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation on the left and Faddom on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Faddom stood in it.
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation first, Faddom not the choice
1 of 14 modelsFaddom was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Qwen 3.7 FlashAkamai Guardicore Segmentation, Illumio Segmentation alternatives: ColorTokens Xshield
Neither was the first choice, one was named
11 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5ColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Workload, Illumio Segmentation, Zero Networks Segment
GPT-5.4 miniIllumio Segmentation alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Zero Networks Segment
Gemini 3.5 FlashColorTokens Xshield alternatives: 6sense, Faddom, HubSpot, SideChannel, Zero Networks Segment
Perplexity SonarColorTokens Xshield, Zscaler Private Access alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Workload, Illumio Segmentation
Grok 4.1 FastColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Illumio Segmentation, Zscaler Private Access
Mistral SmallColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Elisity, Illumio Segmentation
DeepSeek V4 FlashColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Illumio Segmentation
Kimi K2ColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, SideChannel Enclave
GLM 4.7 FlashXColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Illumio Segmentation
GPT-6 LunaIllumio Segmentation alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Workload
Muse Glimmer 30BColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Workload, formerly Tetration, Illumio Segmentation
Neither was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Llama 4 MaverickColorTokens Xshield
MiniMax M2.5ColorTokens Xshield alternatives: Illumio Segmentation
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Level: the same share of first choices.
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation6%#4 of 10Faddom6%#3 of 10Mid-marketThe figures above
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation leads by seven points.
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation12%#3 of 9Faddom5%#4 of 9Enterprise
Faddom is not named for this buyer.
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation15%#2 of 9Faddom—not namedWhat the models said about Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid first if budget is tight: Akamai Guardicore, because pricing can be a constraint.” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · hard negative
“some users report agent overhead, integration bugs, complex maps/visuals, and accuracy limits in risk detection” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“Initial mapping complexity and operational overhead... can be overwhelming to organize manually” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is a top choice due to its strong east-west visibility, ease of deployment, and support for hybrid environments” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Illumio and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation are generally considered the top contenders for this segment” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“For most mid-sized B2B companies, I'd recommend Akamai Guardicore Segmentation as your primary choice.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Faddom
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“Mapping only, not full enforcement” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · soft negative
“The best microsegmentation solution for a company with a limited budget is Faddom, which is a budget-friendly dependency mapping tool.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
“For a company with limited budget, I'd recommend starting with Faddom” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“start with Enclave (free) or Faddom (low-cost)” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
ColorTokens Xshield vs Akamai Guardicore SegmentationColorTokens Xshield vs FaddomIllumio Segmentation vs Akamai Guardicore SegmentationIllumio Segmentation vs FaddomAkamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Zero Networks SegmentAkamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Zscaler Private AccessAkamai Guardicore Segmentation vs VMware NSXFaddom vs Zero Networks SegmentFaddom vs Zscaler Private AccessFaddom vs VMware NSXAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full microsegmentation standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.