4 categories · RankedAcronis
Standing by category
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Backup and disaster recovery | Cloud and infrastructure | 2% | 9 of 121 | 15% | 13 | accepted challenger |
| Extended detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 28 of 61 | 25% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender XDR at 63% |
| Endpoint detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 34 of 54 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Bitdefender GravityZone at 20% |
| Patch management | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 47 of 87 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Action1 at 27% |
Movement
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
By framing
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Veeam or Acronis is the safest recommendation” Perplexity Sonar · Backup and DR · direct prompt · first choice
“| Acronis | MSPs/M365 | Cyber protection bundle, easy UI. | Per user/device | Yes |” Grok 4.1 Fast · Backup and DR · scale prompt · alternative
“Acronis/Datto if you're an MSP wanting integrated or appliance-based BCDR” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Backup and DR · comparative prompt · alternative
“Acronis and Bitdefender are noted as the only two with real on-prem options.” Mistral Small · XDR · negative 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.
“Cautionary Examples: Vendors like Acronis or Bitdefender... they may lack the depth required for advanced threat hunting” Qwen 3.7 Flash · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
“Recent high-severity flaws (e.g., Linux privilege escalation ...) added to CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog” Grok 4.1 Fast · Backup and DR · negative prompt · soft negative
“Some Reddit sysadmins report declining quality and reliability issues in recent years” Kimi K2 · Backup and DR · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
What carried it into the answer
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 26 of the 37 answers that named Acronis and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
Eighty-four of the eighty-four domain citations in answers naming Acronis came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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 Acronis'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 Acronis, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at acronis.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.
Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.