AI Indexes
IT AI Index
Index › Security operations › Client-side protection › Source Defense vs Feroot PaymentGuard
Client-side protection · October 2026 Edition

Source Defense vs Feroot PaymentGuard

One of fourteen models named Source Defense first on the direct prompt; zero named Feroot PaymentGuard. Source Defense was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Feroot PaymentGuard by nine and Source Defense carries 26 labels and Feroot PaymentGuard 20, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Source Defense

criticized challenger

Named in one category this edition.

Feroot PaymentGuard

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share4%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate27%20%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#5A position in a field of 8; printed, not drawn.
Labels2620A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Source Defense reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.cside vs Source Defense · cside vs Feroot PaymentGuard · Reflectiz vs Source Defense

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.
Source DefenseFirst choices, of fourteen modelsFeroot PaymentGuard
Direct101 against Source Defense · 1 against Feroot PaymentGuard
Paraphrase12
Comparative10
Budget-constrained001 against Source Defense · 3 against Feroot PaymentGuard
Scale-constrained00
Negative015 against Source Defense
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, Source Defense and Feroot PaymentGuard were named in the same answer twenty times, of the 69 answers naming Source Defense and the 46 naming Feroot PaymentGuard. In those answers Feroot PaymentGuard took the first choice one time and Source Defense three.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Source Defense and Feroot PaymentGuard stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
Source Defense Feroot PaymentGuard first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Source Defense on the left and Feroot PaymentGuard on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Source Defense and Feroot PaymentGuard stood in it.

Source Defense first, Feroot PaymentGuard not the choice

1 of 14 modelsFeroot PaymentGuard was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Kimi K2Source Defense, c/side alternatives: Cloudflare Page Shield, Feroot 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.
Grok 4.1 FastImperva Client-Side Protection alternatives: Akamai Client-Side Protection, Jscrambler Webpage Integrity, Source Defense
Muse Glimmer 30BBitdefender GravityZone Business Security alternatives: Bitdefender GravityZone EDR, Imperva Client-Side Protection, Source Defense

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
Gemini 3.5 FlashCloudflare Client-Side Security alternatives: Reflectiz, Report URI, c/side
Perplexity SonarAkamai Client-Side Protection & Compliance alternatives: Jscrambler Webpage Integrity, cside
Mistral SmallAkamai Client-Side Protection & Compliance, Jscrambler Webpage Integrity
DeepSeek V4 FlashReflectiz, cside alternatives: Cloudflare's Client-Side Security
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
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

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
Feroot PaymentGuard leads by two points.
Feroot PaymentGuard4%#4 of 9
Source Defense2%#8 of 9
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Source Defense4%#4 of 8
Feroot PaymentGuard4%#5 of 8
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Source Defense8%#5 of 10
Feroot PaymentGuard8%#4 of 10
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Source Defense

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“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
“you do not need to pay $15,000+ per year for enterprise-grade solutions (like Akamai, Jscrambler, or Source Defense)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“Choose In-Browser Runtime Agents (Source Defense / HUMAN) if you operate a high-volume checkout or login page and want *active prevention*” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend starting with c/side (free tier) or Source Defense Essentials ($98/month)” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
“I'd start with Source Defense's PCI Compliance product for a mid-sized B2B company” GPT-6 Luna · paraphrase prompt · first choice

What the models said about Feroot PaymentGuard

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
“Avoid: Enterprise solutions like Akamai, Imperva, or Feroot” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“A caveat: its synthetic crawler can be bypassed by attackers who serve clean scripts to bots and malicious ones to real users.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · soft negative
“Use client-side protection tools that provide active blocking and real-time monitoring (e.g., Feroot, Human Security)” Mistral Small · negative prompt · first choice
“If you want a single practical pick, Feroot PaymentGuard is a strong fit because it is described as low-overhead” Perplexity Sonar · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“I recommend Reflectiz or Feroot as your primary tools” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared

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.