IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Aravo · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Aravo

12Judge labels

1First choices

3Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Aravo was named 2 times in TPRM, where UpGuard led with 53%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business47 of 71

under the label threshold

Mid-market35 of 72

under the label threshold

Enterprise11 of 59

under the label threshold

In tprm · 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 Aravo 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
Third-party risk management	Security operations	0%	35 of 72	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by UpGuard at 53%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Aravo yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Aravo across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	1	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct3 labels1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative4 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative12 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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 Aravo, over the 12 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Aravo was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management10 of 121Not in the top three

Bitsight10 of 120Not in the top three

ProcessUnity9 of 122Not in the top three

SecurityScorecard9 of 120Not in the top three

Prevalent7 of 121Not in the top three

Archer7 of 120Not in the top three

Riskonnect7 of 120Not in the top three

Diligent One6 of 120Not in the top three

MetricStream6 of 120Not in the top three

Vanta6 of 120Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 Aravo. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 12 of the 12 answers that named Aravo and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com10

bitsight.com9

upguard.com7

vanta.com7

g2.com4

learn.g2.com3

riskledger.com3

riskonnect.com3

thedatascientist.com3

aravo.comYour site2

Forty-nine of the fifty-one domain citations in answers naming Aravo came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

bitsight.com/guides/best-third-party-risk-management-platforms-for-enterprises8

upguard.com/blog/best-third-party-risk-management-software-solutions7

gartner.com/reviews/market/third-party-risk-management-technology-solutions6

vanta.com/resources/best-tprm-software-for-enterprises6

gartner.com/reviews/market/it-vendor-risk-management-solutions5

gartner.com/en/documents/76745614

learn.g2.com/best-third-party-risk-management-software3

riskledger.com/resources/best-third-party-risk-management-software3

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Aravo'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 Aravo, 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 aravo.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.