Client-side protection · October 2026 Edition
cside vs Reflectiz
One of fourteen models named cside first on the direct prompt; one named Reflectiz. cside was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Reflectiz by thirteen and cside carries 26 labels and Reflectiz 32, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share13%11%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%19%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#2A position in a field of 8; printed, not drawn.
Labels2632A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, cside reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.cside vs Jscrambler Webpage Integrity · cside vs Source Defense · cside vs Feroot PaymentGuard
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 client-side protection page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
csideFirst choices, of fourteen modelsReflectiz
Direct11
Paraphrase23
Comparative30
Budget-constrained301 against Reflectiz
Scale-constrained01
Negative005 against Reflectiz
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, cside and Reflectiz were named in the same answer thirty-nine times, of the 85 answers naming cside and the 84 naming Reflectiz. In those answers Reflectiz took the first choice three times and cside thirteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where cside and Reflectiz 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 | | | | |
cside Reflectiz first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, cside on the left and Reflectiz on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where cside and Reflectiz stood in it.
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.DeepSeek V4 FlashReflectiz, cside alternatives: Cloudflare's Client-Side Security
Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Gemini 3.5 FlashCloudflare Client-Side Security alternatives: Reflectiz, Report URI, c/side
Perplexity SonarAkamai Client-Side Protection & Compliance alternatives: Jscrambler Webpage Integrity, cside
Neither was named
11 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
GPT-5.4 miniF5 Distributed Cloud Client-Side Defense alternatives: Feroot Security Inspector, Imperva Client-Side Protection
Grok 4.1 FastImperva Client-Side Protection alternatives: Akamai Client-Side Protection, Jscrambler Webpage Integrity, Source Defense
Mistral SmallAkamai Client-Side Protection & Compliance, Jscrambler Webpage Integrity
Llama 4 MaverickAkamai Client-Side Protection & Compliance, Jscrambler Client-Side Protection and Compliance Platform
Qwen 3.7 FlashCrowdStrike Falcon alternatives: Akamai Client-Side Protection, Imperva Client-Side Protection, Jscrambler Webpage Integrity, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint, Sophos Intercept X
Kimi K2Source Defense, c/side alternatives: Cloudflare Page Shield, Feroot Security
GLM 4.7 FlashXJscrambler Webpage Integrity alternatives: Akamai Client-Side Protection & Compliance, Cloudflare Page Shield, Imperva Client-Side Protection
MiniMax M2.5Bitdefender GravityZone alternatives: CrowdStrike Falcon, Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR, SentinelOne Singularity
GPT-6 LunaSophos MDR Complete alternatives: Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Muse Glimmer 30BBitdefender GravityZone Business Security alternatives: Bitdefender GravityZone EDR, Imperva Client-Side Protection, Source Defense
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
Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
What the models said about cside
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“cside is cited in current round-ups as a platform that does server-side payload analysis + client-side Script Method and Scan Method with 100% real-user session coverage.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“cside (Highly ranked in comparisons): Server-side payload analysis + client-side runtime monitoring of 100% real sessions.” Grok 4.1 Fast · comparative prompt · first choice
“the best fit is usually cside, because it has a public starting price of $99/month and also offers a free tier” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Reflectiz
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Tools to Avoid on a Tight Budget - Reflectiz, Feroot, DomDog, Jscrambler” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“solutions from vendors like JScrambler, Reflectiz, Source Defense, and Human Security ... often fail to block the majority of sophisticated e-skimming attacks” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Popular vendors include Human Security, SourceDefense, JScrambler, and Reflectiz. ... JS agents detect behavior after a script has already executed.” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“If your engineers are heavily constrained, look at an agentless scanner (like Reflectiz) which can be spun up in hours with zero code changes.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“or Reflectiz if you want the fastest, lowest-effort deployment with strong supply-chain visibility and no code changes” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Reflectiz's fully remote synthetic monitoring is often the lowest-friction starting point” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared
cside vs Jscrambler Webpage Integritycside vs Source Defensecside vs Feroot PaymentGuardcside vs Imperva Client-Side ProtectionReflectiz vs Jscrambler Webpage IntegrityReflectiz vs Source DefenseReflectiz vs Feroot PaymentGuardReflectiz vs Imperva Client-Side ProtectionAll fifteen head-to-head pages and the full client-side protection 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.