Every category where a model named BreachLock 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
Penetration testing as a service	Security operations	9%	3 of 76	3%	30	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for BreachLock 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 BreachLock across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	2	0	1	0	3
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	3	0	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	3	0	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	3	0	1	4
Mistral Small	0	3	0	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	3	0	0	4
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	1	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	3	0	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	0	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	2	0	0	2

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

Direct17 labels3

Paraphrase22 labels8

Comparative20 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained15 labels7

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative75 labels in all, every segment counted; 18 of the 19 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.

“consider grey-box testing with a provider like BreachLock, UnderDefense, or Kualitatem, as this approach typically offers the best value for money” Claude Haiku 4.5 · PTaaS · budget prompt · first choice

“likely to be a platform-based provider such as Cobalt or BreachLock, which offer more accessible pricing models” Llama 4 Maverick · PTaaS · budget prompt · first choice

“Astra or BreachLock (the ~$2,000–2,500 sweet spot)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · PTaaS · budget prompt · first choice

“Best Overall Value: BreachLock” Claude Haiku 4.5 · PTaaS · paraphrase prompt · first choice

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.

“PTaaS from ~$3K-$10K/yr; crowdsourced for value, but less "one-off cheap."” Grok 4.1 Fast · PTaaS · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as BreachLock, over the 75 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and BreachLock was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Cobalt62 of 7526Compare →

Astra Security39 of 7512Compare →

NetSPI29 of 758Not in the top three

Synack27 of 752Not in the top three

Bishop Fox20 of 751Not in the top three

Bugcrowd18 of 750Not in the top three

Intruder16 of 751Not in the top three

HackerOne16 of 750Not in the top three

Acunetix14 of 751Not in the top three

UnderDefense13 of 750Not 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 BreachLock. 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 65 of the 75 answers that named BreachLock and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

deepstrike.io51

techrepublic.com39

synack.com35

terra.security33

underdefense.com33

stingrai.io27

cybri.com25

getastra.com25

softwaresecured.com24

brightdefense.com21

313 of the 313 domain citations in answers naming BreachLock came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

techrepublic.com/article/best-penetration-testing-companies39

deepstrike.io/blog/top-penetration-testing-as-a-service-ptaas34

terra.security/blog/top-10-penetration-testing-as-a-service-ptaas-providers33

synack.com/blog/best-penetration-testing-companies32

underdefense.com/blog/penetration-testing-services29

deepstrike.io/blog/top-penetration-testing-companies28

softwaresecured.com/post/top-10-penetration-testing-vendors19

soc2auditors.org/penetration-testing-firms16

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 BreachLock'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 BreachLock, 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 breachlock.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.