Threat intelligence platforms · October 2026 Edition
MISP vs Cyble Vision
Zero of fourteen models named MISP first on the direct prompt; two named Cyble Vision. MISP was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Cyble Vision by eight and MISP carries 36 labels and Cyble Vision 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share12%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate19%15%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#7A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels3613A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, MISP reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.ThreatConnect was named alongside these two in eight of the fourteen direct answers. MISP vs Recorded Future Intelligence Cloud · MISP vs Anomali ThreatStream · MISP vs SOCRadar Extended Threat Intelligence
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 threat intelligence platforms page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
MISPFirst choices, of fourteen modelsCyble Vision
Direct021 against MISP
Paraphrase001 against MISP
Comparative012 against MISP
Budget-constrained701 against Cyble Vision
Scale-constrained01
Negative003 against MISP · 1 against Cyble Vision
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.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where MISP and Cyble Vision 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 | | | | |
MISP Cyble Vision first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, MISP on the left and Cyble Vision on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where MISP and Cyble Vision stood in it.
Cyble Vision first, MISP not the choice
2 of 14 modelsMISP was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Mistral SmallCyble Vision, Rapid7 Threat Command alternatives: UpGuard
DeepSeek V4 FlashCyble Vision, Rapid7 Threat Command alternatives: Anomali ThreatStream, CrowdStrike Falcon, NordStellar, OpenCTI
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.Claude Haiku 4.5Recorded Future Intelligence Cloud alternatives: CloudSEK, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cyble Vision, Mandiant Threat Intelligence
Muse Glimmer 30BUpGuard alternatives: Cyble Vision, ThreatConnect
Neither was named
10 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniRecorded Future Intelligence Cloud alternatives: Anomali ThreatStream, ThreatConnect
Gemini 3.5 FlashFlare, SOCRadar Extended Threat Intelligence alternatives: CrowdStrike Falcon Intelligence, UpGuard
Perplexity SonarSOCRadar Extended Threat Intelligence alternatives: Flare, Rapid7 Threat Command, ThreatConnect
Grok 4.1 FastCrowdStrike Falcon Intelligence alternatives: Anomali ThreatStream, Flashpoint Ignite, ManageEngine Log360, Recorded Future Intelligence Cloud, ThreatConnect
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashThreatConnect alternatives: ManageEngine Log360, UpGuard
Kimi K2Anomali ThreatStream, ThreatConnect alternatives: Google Threat Intelligence, NordStellar
GLM 4.7 FlashXRecorded Future Intelligence Cloud, ThreatSearch alternatives: Anomali ThreatStream, ThreatConnect
MiniMax M2.5Rapid7 Threat Command alternatives: ManageEngine Log360, UpGuard
GPT-6 LunaRecorded Future Intelligence Cloud alternatives: Anomali ThreatStream, ThreatConnect
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
MISP leads by eighteen points.
MISP18%#1 of 14Cyble Vision0%#– of 14Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
The order flips: Cyble Vision leads at enterprise.
Cyble Vision2%#– of 11MISP0%#11 of 11What the models said about MISP
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“avoid building a MISP instance yourself” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Why Be Cautious: They are only "free" if your time is free... choosing an open-source platform will likely result in "shelfware""},{"vendor_raw_name":"OpenCTI","label":"soft_negative","position":2,"evidence":"Open-source platforms like MISP and OpenCTI are world-class... Why Be Cautious: They are only "free" if your time is free.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“tools like MISP and OpenCTI are often valid, but they may require more internal effort and may not suit teams that need turnkey enterprise support” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“For most companies with a limited budget, I'd start with MISP. It's free, open-source, and built to collect, organize, correlate, and share threat indicators.” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with MISP if you have technical staff who can manage it—it's the most mature and widely adopted open-source option” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
“MISP is the most widely deployed open-source TIP globally. It is completely free and open-source under the AGPL license” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Cyble Vision
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of five in this category shown.
“Cyble received criticism for: Duplicate notifications and unreliable alert delivery → alert fatigue, Poor customer support” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“positioned for larger teams or come with custom pricing, so they are usually not the best first pick when budget is constrained” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · soft negative
“Cyble Vision ranks first for combining external threat intelligence, dark web monitoring, attack surface management, and brand protection into a single AI-native platform.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
“prioritize platforms that offer Extended Threat Intelligence (XTI) or Brand/Identity protection (like SOCRadar, Flare, or Cyble)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“Rapid7 Threat Command and Cyble Vision are the strongest overall picks” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
MISP vs Recorded Future Intelligence CloudMISP vs Anomali ThreatStreamMISP vs SOCRadar Extended Threat IntelligenceMISP vs ThreatConnectMISP vs AlienVault OTXMISP vs CrowdStrike Falcon IntelligenceRecorded Future Intelligence Cloud vs Cyble VisionAnomali ThreatStream vs Cyble VisionSOCRadar Extended Threat Intelligence vs Cyble VisionThreatConnect vs Cyble VisionAlienVault OTX vs Cyble VisionCyble Vision vs CrowdStrike Falcon IntelligenceAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full threat intel 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.