AI Indexes
IT AI Index
Index › Security operations › OT/IoT security › Fortinet OT Security Platform vs Armis Centrix
OT and IoT security · October 2026 Edition

Fortinet OT Security Platform vs Armis Centrix

Two of fourteen models named Fortinet OT Security Platform first on the direct prompt; one named Armis Centrix. Fortinet OT Security Platform was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Armis Centrix by fourteen and Fortinet OT Security Platform carries 23 labels and Armis Centrix 31, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Named in one category this edition.

Armis Centrix

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

First-choice share8%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate4%13%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#5A position in a field of 9; printed, not drawn.
Labels2331A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Fortinet OT Security Platform reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Claroty xDome was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Fortinet OT Security Platform · Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Armis Centrix · Claroty xDome vs Fortinet OT Security Platform

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 OT and IoT security page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Fortinet OT Security PlatformFirst choices, of fourteen modelsArmis Centrix
Direct21
Paraphrase02
Comparative00
Budget-constrained20
Scale-constrained00
Negative011 against Fortinet OT Security Platform · 4 against Armis Centrix
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, Fortinet OT Security Platform and Armis Centrix were named in the same answer thirty-two times, of the 67 answers naming Fortinet OT Security Platform and the 106 naming Armis Centrix. In those answers Armis Centrix took the first choice one time and Fortinet OT Security Platform two.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Fortinet OT Security Platform and Armis Centrix 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
Fortinet OT Security Platform Armis Centrix first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Fortinet OT Security Platform on the left and Armis Centrix on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Fortinet OT Security Platform and Armis Centrix stood in it.

Fortinet OT Security Platform first, Armis Centrix not the choice

2 of 14 modelsArmis Centrix was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Gemini 3.5 FlashFortinet OT Security Platform, Microsoft Defender for IoT alternatives: Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian
GLM 4.7 FlashXFortinet OT Security Platform alternatives: Dragos Platform, Nozomi Networks Guardian

Armis Centrix first, Fortinet OT Security Platform an alternative

1 of 14 modelsFortinet OT Security Platform was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Kimi K2Armis Centrix, Claroty xDome alternatives: Fortinet OT Security Platform, Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Guardian

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.
Claude Haiku 4.5Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian alternatives: Dragos Platform, Fortinet OT Security Platform, Palo Alto Networks, Tenable OT Security
GPT-5.4 miniClaroty xDome alternatives: Armis Centrix, Dragos Platform
Perplexity SonarRadiflow360 alternatives: Claroty xDome, Dragos Platform, Fortinet OT Security Platform, Palo Alto Networks
Grok 4.1 FastClaroty xDome alternatives: Dragos Platform, Fortinet OT Security Platform, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Palo Alto Networks
MiniMax M2.5Radiflow360 alternatives: Armis Centrix, Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Tenable OT Security

Neither was named

6 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Mistral SmallDragos Platform alternatives: Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian
DeepSeek V4 FlashClaroty xDome alternatives: Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Palo Alto Networks Industrial OT Security
Llama 4 MaverickPalo Alto Networks alternatives: Claroty xDome, Forcepoint
Qwen 3.7 FlashIndustrial AI alternatives: Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Tenable.io OT
GPT-6 LunaNozomi Networks Vantage alternatives: Claroty xDome, Dragos Platform
Muse Glimmer 30BRadiflow360 alternatives: Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian

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
Fortinet OT Security Platform leads by four points.
Fortinet OT Security Platform7%#2 of 9
Armis Centrix2%#5 of 9
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Fortinet OT Security Platform leads by two points.
Fortinet OT Security Platform8%#4 of 9
Armis Centrix6%#5 of 9
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Armis Centrix leads at enterprise.
Armis Centrix6%#5 of 9
Fortinet OT Security Platform4%#6 of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Fortinet OT Security Platform

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

“may be better evaluated as infrastructure/security-control platforms than as best-in-class OT-native monitors” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Microsoft Defender for IoT (if you are a Microsoft shop) or Fortinet (if you use their network hardware) are the most successful starting points” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Fortinet offers a cost-effective entry point with OT appliances starting at $2,200-$4,000” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with Fortinet for network-based protection and segmentation” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Armis Centrix

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

“Example Platforms to approach with caution: Armis Centrix (or similar integration-heavy IT/IoT platforms)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Strong on IoT/XIoT discovery but weaker on deep OT protocol knowledge vs. natives like Dragos/Nozomi.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“not the same as deep OT-native detection; they may be better suited to IoT visibility” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“I'd recommend Armis as the primary choice due to its balance of comprehensive device discovery, ease of implementation, and vendor compatibility” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“You should only choose Agentless (passive monitoring) platforms like Claroty, Nozomi, or Armis for OT.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · first choice
“start with Claroty xDome or Armis” Kimi K2 · direct 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.