Deception technology · October 2026 Edition
Acalvio ShadowPlex vs Illusive Networks
Four of fourteen models named Acalvio ShadowPlex first on the direct prompt; one named Illusive Networks. Acalvio ShadowPlex was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Illusive Networks by eight and Acalvio ShadowPlex carries 42 labels and Illusive Networks 12, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Illusive Networks
criticized challengerNamed in one category this edition.
First-choice share9%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate14%42%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#7A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels4212A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Acalvio ShadowPlex reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Thinkst Canary was named alongside these two in eight of the fourteen direct answers. Thinkst Canary vs Acalvio ShadowPlex · Thinkst Canary vs Illusive Networks · Acalvio ShadowPlex vs Tracebit
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 deception technology page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Acalvio ShadowPlexFirst choices, of fourteen modelsIllusive NetworksDirect411 against Acalvio ShadowPlex · 1 against Illusive Networks
Paraphrase001 against Acalvio ShadowPlex · 1 against Illusive Networks
Comparative81
Budget-constrained002 against Acalvio ShadowPlex
Scale-constrained001 against Acalvio ShadowPlex
Negative101 against Acalvio ShadowPlex · 3 against Illusive Networks
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, Acalvio ShadowPlex and Illusive Networks were named in the same answer twenty-nine times, of the 110 answers naming Acalvio ShadowPlex and the 36 naming Illusive Networks. In those answers Illusive Networks took the first choice two times and Acalvio ShadowPlex nine.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Acalvio ShadowPlex and Illusive Networks stood in it.
| Model | DirectIN | ParaphraseIN | ComparativeIN | Budget-constrainedIN | Scale-constrainedIN | NegativeIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | IN | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | IN | ||||
| Mistral Small | | | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | IN | | | IN | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | |||||
| Kimi K2 | IN | IN | ||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | IN | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | IN | IN | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | IN |
Acalvio ShadowPlexIN Illusive Networks first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Acalvio ShadowPlex on the left and Illusive Networks on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Acalvio ShadowPlex and Illusive Networks stood in it.
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.MiniMax M2.5Acalvio ShadowPlex, Illusive Networks
Acalvio ShadowPlex first, Illusive Networks not the choice
3 of 14 modelsIllusive Networks was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Perplexity SonarAcalvio ShadowPlex alternatives: Fortinet FortiDeceptor, Thinkst Canary
Grok 4.1 FastAcalvio ShadowPlex alternatives: Fortinet FortiDeceptor, Thinkst Canary
Mistral SmallAcalvio ShadowPlex, Attivo Networks ThreatDefend
Neither was the first choice, one was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniThinkst Canary alternatives: Acalvio ShadowPlex
DeepSeek V4 FlashTracebit alternatives: Acalvio ShadowPlex, Fidelis Deception, FortiDeceptor
GLM 4.7 FlashXRapid7 InsightIDR alternatives: Acalvio ShadowPlex, Fortinet FortiDeceptor
GPT-6 LunaTracebit alternatives: Acalvio ShadowPlex, Thinkst Canary, Zscaler Deception
Muse Glimmer 30BFortinet FortiDeceptor, Rapid7 Incident Command alternatives: Acalvio ShadowPlex, Proofpoint, Thinkst Canary
Neither was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Deceptive Bytes alternatives: Acalvio 360 Deception, Illusive, Thinkst Canary
Gemini 3.5 FlashThinkst Canary alternatives: SentinelOne Singularity Hologram, Tracebit
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashHoneypot.io alternatives: Attivo Networks, Cymulate, Microsoft Defender XDR
Kimi K2Thinkst Canary alternatives: TrapEye, Trapster
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.
Acalvio ShadowPlex0%#9 of 9Illusive Networks0%#– of 9
The full small business standing →Mid-marketThe figures above
Acalvio ShadowPlex leads by seven points.
Acalvio ShadowPlex9%#2 of 11Illusive Networks2%#7 of 11
The full mid-market standing →Enterprise
Acalvio ShadowPlex leads by forty-five points.
Acalvio ShadowPlex47%#1 of 8Illusive Networks2%#7 of 8
The full enterprise standing →What the models said about Acalvio ShadowPlex
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“look out for architectural red flags when evaluating active deception platforms (such as those from Acalvio, CounterCraft, or Fidelis Security)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“massive enterprise "deception grids" (such as Acalvio, Fidelis, or SentinelOne Attivo) are highly effective, they are cost-prohibitive” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“this complexity often translates to higher pricing and more required administrative upkeep” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · soft negative
“Consistently ranked as a leader in GigaOm’s Radar Report (2023–2024)... stands out for its centralized Deception Farm architecture, cloud-native design, and AI-driven countermeasures” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · first choice
“I recommend requesting demos from Illusive Networks and Acalvio specifically, as they appear most focused on the mid-market segment.” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“If you want enterprise-scale automation with very low operational burden, Acalvio is the recognized leader.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
What the models said about Illusive Networks
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Pure network-wide standalone deception from Illusive is essentially sunsetted” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Caution flags: Reviews note it is "heavily focused on Microsoft environments" and has "limited cloud-native capabilities."” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“legacy Illusive installs should be treated as end-of-life from a vendor perspective” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“I recommend requesting demos from Illusive Networks and Acalvio specifically, as they appear most focused on the mid-market segment.” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Often rated as the best overall deception platform for operational value.” Kimi K2 · comparative prompt · first choice
“excels at identity and credential deception, providing agentless decoys that disrupt lateral movement” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · alternative
Also compared
Thinkst Canary vs Acalvio ShadowPlexThinkst Canary vs Illusive NetworksAcalvio ShadowPlex vs TracebitAcalvio ShadowPlex vs OpenCanaryAcalvio ShadowPlex vs Fortinet FortiDeceptorAcalvio ShadowPlex vs T-PotTracebit vs Illusive NetworksOpenCanary vs Illusive NetworksFortinet FortiDeceptor vs Illusive NetworksT-Pot vs Illusive NetworksAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full deception 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.