Small business▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 12 → 21 of 114
1 category · RankedAbuse.ch
25Judge labels
1First choices
0Negative labels
9 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in Threat intel for mid-market buyers
Rank 13 of 119 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 10 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Abuse.ch →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business27 of 126
0%12 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market13 of 119
2%10 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise24 of 83
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
In threat intel · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Abuse.ch for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intelligence platforms | Security operations | 2% | 13 of 119 | 0% | 10 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Abuse.ch held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Threat intel · by segment
Mid-market▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 20 → 12 of 111
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 23 of 78, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intel | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 20 → 13 of 119 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Abuse.ch across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Abuse.ch across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase12 labelsNone
Comparative1 labelNone
Budget-constrained7 labels1
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative4 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative25 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“I'd recommend starting with a free platform like OTX or abuse.ch” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Threat intel · budget prompt · first choice
“Use AlienVault OTX + VirusTotal + abuse.ch (URLhaus, ThreatFox, MalwareBazaar) to get baseline threat data” MiniMax M2.5 · Threat intel · budget prompt · alternative
“Highly reliable, community-vetted feeds... The false-positive rate is incredibly low.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Threat intel · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“abuse.ch is valuable for malware- and phishing-related indicators” Perplexity Sonar · Threat intel · paraphrase prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Abuse.ch, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Abuse.ch was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Abuse.ch, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Abuse.ch was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Abuse.ch. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 25 of the 25 answers that named Abuse.ch and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
upguard.com15
flare.io13
g2.com13
vectra.ai13
learn.g2.com10
wiz.io10
comparitech.com9
cyware.com9
it-ai-index.com9
underdefense.com9
110 of the 110 domain citations in answers naming Abuse.ch came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
abuse.ch is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Abuse.ch takes 2% of first choices and MISP takes 12%.ShowHide
Search and answers
abuse.ch is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Abuse.ch takes 2% of first choices and MISP takes 12%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “threat intelligence platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “threat intelligence platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 140 a month (“abuse.ch”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 0 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 4,272 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 1,240 · 99 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 4,418
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 13 of 119 in threat intel
Segment leader
12%
MISP
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 25 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 25 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on abuse.ch
10,026
subdomains included
Content
26
counted in the table below
Documentation
2
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 24 | 1 | 2026-07-28 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 2 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-07-28Introducing abuse ch community hub blog
- 2025-07-29Creating sustainability for abuse ch and its community blog
- 2025-03-11Introducing abuse ch hunting platform blog
- 2024-11-18Community first blog
- 2024-11-11Ach stec the impact of your contributions blog
- 2022-08-08Abuse ch appoints spamhaus as a licensee blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page abuse.ch exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Abuse.ch
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Abuse.ch; a claim can dispute any of them.
abuse.ch 4Abuse.ch (URLhaus, ThreatFox, MalwareBazaar) 1
Follow Abuse.ch
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Abuse.ch is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Abuse.ch is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Independent, community-driven cyber threat intelligence.
- For
- security researchers, network operators, law enforcement agencies, IT security experts, cybersecurity researchers and practitioners, anti-virus vendors and threat intelligence providers
- Price stated
- completely free of charge abuse.ch
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What Abuse.ch's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: abuse.ch. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Abuse.ch's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Abuse.ch, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Abuse.ch by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Abuse.ch is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Abuse.ch, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.