Communications archiving and compliance · October 2026 Edition
Google Vault vs MailStore Server
Zero of fourteen models named Google Vault first on the direct prompt; one named MailStore Server. Google Vault was named by eleven of the fourteen models and MailStore Server by seven and Google Vault carries 17 labels and MailStore Server 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share8%7%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate18%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#6A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels1713A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Google Vault reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Smarsh Enterprise Archive was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. Smarsh Enterprise Archive vs Google Vault · Smarsh Enterprise Archive vs MailStore Server · Mimecast Cloud Archive vs Google Vault
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 communications archiving and compliance page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Google VaultFirst choices, of fourteen modelsMailStore Server
Direct01
Paraphrase101 against Google Vault
Comparative001 against Google Vault
Budget-constrained43
Scale-constrained00
Negative001 against Google Vault
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, Google Vault and MailStore Server were named in the same answer twenty-one times, of the 60 answers naming Google Vault and the 47 naming MailStore Server. In those answers MailStore Server took the first choice three times and Google Vault nine.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Google Vault and MailStore Server 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 | |
Google Vault MailStore Server first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Google Vault on the left and MailStore Server on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Google Vault and MailStore Server stood in it.
MailStore Server first, Google Vault not the choice
1 of 14 modelsGoogle Vault was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Kimi K2Barracuda Cloud Archiving Service, MailStore Server alternatives: Jatheon, Mimecast Cloud Archive, Smarsh Enterprise Archive
Neither was the first choice, one was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Mimecast Cloud Archive, Smarsh Enterprise Archive alternatives: Arcserve UDP Archiving, ComplyKEY MailMeter, MailStore Server
Neither was named
12 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniSmarsh Enterprise Archive alternatives: Archive360, Microsoft Purview, Mimecast Cloud Archive, Theta Lake
Gemini 3.5 FlashMimecast Cloud Archive alternatives: Barracuda Cloud Archiving Service, Proofpoint Enterprise Archive, Theta Lake
Perplexity SonarSmarsh Enterprise Archive alternatives: Global Relay, Mimecast Archiving, Wordwatch
Grok 4.1 FastSmarsh Enterprise Archive alternatives: Global Relay, Jatheon
Mistral SmallMimecast Cloud Archive, Smarsh Enterprise Archive alternatives: Microsoft Purview, Proofpoint Enterprise Archive
DeepSeek V4 FlashJatheon alternatives: Mimecast Cloud Archive, Proofpoint Enterprise Archive
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashMimecast Cloud Archive, Proofpoint Enterprise Archive alternatives: Global Relay, OpenText, Smarsh Enterprise Archive, Wordwatch
GLM 4.7 FlashXGlobal Relay, Smarsh Enterprise Archive alternatives: Mimecast Cloud Archive, Theta Lake, Wordwatch
MiniMax M2.5Global Relay, Smarsh Enterprise Archive alternatives: Mimecast Cloud Archive, Proofpoint Enterprise Archive, Theta Lake
GPT-6 LunaMimecast Cloud Archive alternatives: Global Relay, Microsoft Purview, Proofpoint Enterprise Archive, Smarsh Enterprise Archive
Muse Glimmer 30BBarracuda Archiving Service / Barracuda Cloud Archiving Service alternatives: Global Relay, Proofpoint Enterprise Archive, Smarsh Enterprise Archive, Wordwatch
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
Google Vault leads by two points.
Google Vault20%#1 of 10MailStore Server18%#2 of 10Mid-marketThe figures above
Google Vault leads by two points.
Google Vault8%#4 of 12MailStore Server7%#6 of 12Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Google Vault0%#10 of 10MailStore Server0%#– of 10What the models said about Google Vault
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“built-in tools like Microsoft 365 retention, Google Vault, and Slack’s native archive are repeatedly described as insufficient for full compliance” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Limitation: Less robust than dedicated platforms for regulated industries” Kimi K2 · comparative prompt · soft negative
“Google Vault will not easily archive MS Teams” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“start with MailStore Server (if you can handle on-premises) or Google Vault (if already using Google Workspace)” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Google Vault stands out as the best communications archiving platform for a company with a limited budget” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · first choice
“Google Vault is often recommended as a cost-effective communications archiving solution” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about MailStore Server
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“1-5 users, on-prem, minimal spend: MailStore Server Starter Kit at $259 one-time ... is the cheapest proven option.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“For the tightest budget, start with MailStore Server (if you can handle on-premises) or Google Vault” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with Barracuda or MailStore if your needs are primarily email compliance and eDiscovery.” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Smarsh Enterprise Archive vs Google VaultSmarsh Enterprise Archive vs MailStore ServerMimecast Cloud Archive vs Google VaultMimecast Cloud Archive vs MailStore ServerMicrosoft Purview vs Google VaultMicrosoft Purview vs MailStore ServerGoogle Vault vs JatheonGoogle Vault vs Barracuda Cloud Archiving ServiceGoogle Vault vs Proofpoint Enterprise ArchiveJatheon vs MailStore ServerMailStore Server vs Barracuda Cloud Archiving ServiceMailStore Server vs Proofpoint Enterprise ArchiveAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full comms archiving 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.