Small business▲+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 67 → 16 of 69
6 categories · RankedBitsight
197Judge labels
12First choices
58Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
6Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
13% in TPRM for enterprise buyers
Rank 84 of 87 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 42% of its 31 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Bitsight →By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
Small business18 of 71
2%20 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market84 of 87
0%31 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise3 of 72
13%42 labels
accepted challenger
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 Bitsight 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Third-party risk management | Security operations | 0% | 84 of 87 | 42% | 31 | criticized challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Attack surface management | Security operations | 0% | 88 of 100 | 41% | 22 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Cyber risk quantification | Security operations | 0% | 24 of 116 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by CyberSaint CyberStrong at 25% | |
| Digital risk protection | Security operations | 0% | 39 of 86 | 33% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by UpGuard BreachSight at 22% | |
| Threat intelligence platforms | Security operations | 0% | 106 of 119 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by MISP at 12% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| SaaS security posture management | Security operations | 0% | 57 of 95 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Wing Security at 30% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Bitsight held within the floor in all six categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · TPRM · by segment
Mid-market▼−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 7 → 71 of 82
Enterprise▼−8Since September 2026: 23% → 15%, −8 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
15%from 23% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 3 pointsRank 2 → 3 of 68
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TPRM | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 7 → 84 of 87 |
| ASM | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 32 → 88 of 100 |
| Cyber risk quant | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 24 of 116, unchanged |
| DRP | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 39 of 86, unchanged |
| Threat intel | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 37 → 106 of 119 |
| SSPM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 57 of 95, unchanged |
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 Bitsight 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 Bitsight 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 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 8 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 8 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 5 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 10 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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
Direct32 labels4
Paraphrase37 labels6
Comparative54 labels6not counted in share
Budget-constrained13 labelsNone
Scale-constrained24 labels2
Negative37 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative197 labels in all, every segment counted; 12 of the 18 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.
“It is the leader in external risk and supply chain visibility... making it the go-to tool for communicating risk to boards and investors.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Cyber risk quant · comparative prompt · first choice
“Need continuous cyber monitoring of vendors: Bitsight, SecurityScorecard, Black Kite, RiskRecon.” GPT-5.4 mini · TPRM · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best for large enterprises: Cortex Xpanse or Bitsight” Perplexity Sonar · ASM · comparative prompt · first choice
“Choose BitSight / SecurityScorecard / UpGuard if what you really need is more third-party/vendor cyber risk scoring than true DRP.” GPT-5.4 mini · DRP · direct 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.
“Similar concerns to SecurityScorecard: Opaque methodology: Critics question how scores are calculated” MiniMax M2.5 · ASM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Quote-only pricing (SecurityScorecard, BitSight): Often expensive and unpredictable” Kimi K2 · TPRM · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid at all costs (for your budget): Enterprise platforms like BitSight” DeepSeek V4 Flash · ASM · budget prompt · hard negative
“do not use them as your primary operational EASM tool for your own defense.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ASM · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Bitsight, over the 197 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Bitsight was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Bitsight, over the 197 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Bitsight 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 Bitsight. 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 189 of the 197 answers that named Bitsight and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
bitsight.comYour site115
upguard.com96
g2.com68
atlassystems.com48
vanta.com46
riskpublishing.com43
gartner.com41
riskledger.com38
learn.g2.com37
mitratech.com37
454 of the 569 domain citations in answers naming Bitsight came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
bitsight.com ranks 4 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Bitsight takes 0% of first choices and UpGuard takes 55%.ShowHide
Search and answers
bitsight.com ranks 4 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Bitsight takes 0% of first choices and UpGuard takes 55%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “third-party risk management platform”
6
Position for “third-party risk management platforms”
5
- Searches for its name, Google
- 4,400 a month (“bitsight”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 146 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 126,245 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 8,270 · 861 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 6,689
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 3 clicks and $60 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 84 of 87 in TPRM
Segment leader
55%
UpGuard
- First choices
- 12 across its categories
- Named in
- 197 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 189 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 bitsight.com
22,832
subdomains included
Content
2,355
counted in the table below
Documentation
1
Product · Integration
60 · 10
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 1,444 | 11 | 2026-09-28 | GRC | |
| News or press | 448 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 185 | 1 | 2026-07-08 | SIEM | |
| Report or ebook | 169 | undated | GRC | ||
| Case study | 33 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 33 | 0 | 2026-01-02 | ||
| Conference or event | 28 | 0 | 2017-06-23 | ||
| Template or tool | 9 | 0 | 2025-03-18 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 5 | 0 | 2014-12-10 | ||
| Podcast or video | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-28Critical vulnerability alert cve 2026 88771 cve 2026 88772 citrix netscaler flaws under exploitation blog
- 2026-09-22Identity risk 5 emerging identity access pathways blog
- 2026-09-17Ai vulnerability exploitation attack paths blog
- 2026-09-17Critical vulnerability alert cve 2026 76460 cisco ise authentication bypass blog
- 2026-09-16How bitsight uses ai to accelerate product fingerprinting blog
- 2026-09-117 Cybersecurity Frameworks blog
Events in person
Last twelve months
- February 19, 2026Petit-déjeuner Bitsight – 19 février 2026 ParisParis · hosted
- December 9, 2025Exclusive Executive Dinner at Canary WharfLondon · hosted
As the event pages on bitsight.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page bitsight.com 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. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Bitsight
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Bitsight; a claim can dispute any of them.
BitSight 33
Follow Bitsight
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
Bitsight is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Bitsight is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Cyber risk solutions that scale with your business
- For
- organizations
- Price stated
- Bitsight offers flexible pricing based on the solutions, capabilities, and level of support your organization needs. bitsight.com/pricing-packaging
- Free plan or trial
- Free Cyber Risk Report bitsight.com/pricing-packaging
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type 2E.U.-U.S. Data Privacy FrameworkSwiss-U.S. Data Privacy FrameworkUK Extension of the Data Privacy FrameworkTRUSTe APEC and PRP Enterprise CertifiedCSA Trusted Cloud Provider StatusSTAR Enabled SolutionCCPA compliant
- Hosting
- United StatesUS data centers
- Customers named
- AVEVAAxis Max Life InsuranceBearingPointCabela’sCentre for Cybersecurity BelgiumCornerstone Building BrandsCoventry Building SocietyDATAMARK
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations
What Bitsight's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: bitsight.com, bitsight.com/pricing-packaging, bitsight.com/security, bitsight.com/platform, bitsight.com/resources/case-studies. 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 Bitsight'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 Bitsight, 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 Bitsight by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Bitsight 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 Bitsight, 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.